Reforms in party system in India
8 views
Skip to first unread message
satinder gambhir
Jul 11, 2009, 4:58:06 AM7/11/09
to India Policy Institute
India the biggest democratic country in world along with US, just
concluded its 15th general Lok Sabha Elections. Election period was
extended to over more then month and elections were held in five
phases. Now that the elections are over, results are already there and
we are seeing Dr. Manmohan Singh as our Prime Minister for the second
time in a row. Results clearly were in his and his party`s favor. This
time elections were held in presidential type like, we see in America.
Both major parties Indian National Congress and Bhartiya Janta Party
named there prime ministerial candidates in advance. INC named Dr.
Manmohan Singh and BJP named L.K.Advani. Both parties were major
parties in there respective groups i.e. United Progressive Alliance
(UPA) and National Democratic Alliance (NDA). With this, we can see
that electorate in India was having a clear choice between two. Which
also mean that India is coming back to two party norms once again. UPA
with its six allies and others got total of 262 seats, while congress
was winner in 206 seats, while NDA with its six parties in its fold
got only 157 seats while BJP the major party in group, on its own got
116. Rest of the seats were divided between third fronts led by left,
which got 80 seats and newly formed forth front ,comprising Lalu
Prasad Yadav`s RJD, Mulyam Singh`s SP and Ram Vilas Paswan`s party ,
27. Other smaller parties and independents got 17 seats across India.
Members of the Lok Sabha are elected in single-
member constituencies by the first-past-the-post system used in
parliamentary elections in the U.K. However, unlike in Britain, no
single party has won an overall parliamentary majority in a general
election in India since 1984. In 1984 however, Congress which at the
time had ruled India for all but three years since the attainment of
independence in 1947 - won a record landslide victory, following the
assassination of then Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi. but after
1989, Congress has been in and out of office, while BJP has emerged as
a formidable rival to the Congress Party. In the meantime, India,
which previously had a multi-party system with one dominant party -
namely Congress - developed a highly fractious party system
characterized by a proliferation of regional parties, which stands in
stark contrast with the two-party (or at least two-party dominant)
systems. Nonetheless, the outcome of this year's election, in which
Congress won 206 seats (up from 145 in 2004) constitutes the best
showing of any party since 1991, when a wave of sympathy following the
assassination of then-Congress leader and P.M. Rajiv Gandhi in the
middle of a general election allowed the party to capture 232 seats in
the Lok Sabha. Conversely, BJP had its worst result since 1991,
although the party remains by far the second largest in India.
In this context first we have to understand
the party or political party. Political parties are indispensable to
any democratic system and play the most crucial role in the electoral
process – in setting up candidates and conducting election campaigns.
The legal and constitutional position of political parties varies
from country to country. In most democratic countries, however, there
is neither any direct constitutional provision regulating the
functioning of political parties, nor any legal sanction establishing
political parties as a necessary governmental institution, although
there are some governmental systems which try to prescribe some
conditions for the operation of party system. French Republic,
prescribes that Parliament (The French National Assembly) cannot make
a law that may abridge the right of the political parties to carry on
their activities freely. This is perhaps a tacit recognition of the
existence of political parties as a sine qua non of a democratic
system. The Federal Government of Germany has thoroughly
institutionalized the structure of political parties, by introducing
the 5% clause, which makes it extremely difficult for minority or
splinter parties to form and flourish. The Law guarantees the
legitimacy of parties and their right to exist, if they accept the
principle of democratic government. The Canadian practice of
Registration of Party or Party foundation is very comprehensive.
Parties are registered on certain conditions and party leaders are
selected through a national leadership convention composed of
provincial party delegates voting as individuals.
But here in India, Political parties do not as
such find any direct mention in the Constitution of India. In the
absence of a sufficiently detailed constitutional provisions, the
major onus of framing and administering the rules and regulations
governing political parties in India has fallen on the Election
Commission, a constitutional body responsible for conduct of
elections. The Election Commission of India has the ultimate power
to accord recognition and status of political parties to “the
association or body of citizens of India". The Election Commission has
the power to decide whether or not to register an association or body
of individuals as a political party. To make Political party, it is
mandatory for any association or body of individuals of India calling
itself a political party to make an application to the Election
Commission for its registration as a political party, within thirty
days following the date of its formation. Major requirement with the
application is that it shall be accompanied by a copy of the
memorandum or rules and regulations of the association or body, by
whatever name called, and such memorandum or rules and regulations
shall contain a specific provision that the association or body shall
bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India, and to
the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy and would uphold
the sovereignty, unity and integrity and unity of India. The decision
of the Commission to give recognization as a political party is final
in this regard. The recognized political parties are accorded the
status of a National or State political party. In 1951 there were 14
National parties while presently there are 7 National political
parties. There were times when there was no national party at all,
These were at that time called multi-State parties!It was during 1962
and 1967. It may be noted that political parties in India are also
sometimes categorized by Educationists, Journalists ,observers,
academics and political analysts on the basis of their territorial or
geographical representation, such as: All India parties, Regional
parties and Local parties. This is done by them only as a matter of
convenience to argue a particular point, or identify them in a
particular way, and does not in any way reflect either any official
party classification recognized by the Government or by the Election
Commission. Similarly any identification of a party on the basis of
its ideological orientation as a party of the left, right, center,
socialist, communist, communalist or leader- centered etc. bears no
official recognition.
According to the Election Symbols (Reservation
and Allotment) Order, 1968, as recently amended, a political party
shall be treated as a recognized National party, if, and only if,
either
(A)
(i) the candidates set up by it, in any four or more States, at the
last general election to the House of the People, or to the
Legislative Assembly of the State concerned, have secured not less
than six percent of the total valid votes polled in their respective
States at that general election; and
(ii) in addition, it has returned at least four members to the House
of the People at the aforesaid last general election from any State or
States;
or
(B)
(i) its candidates have been elected to the House of the People, at
the last general election to that House, from at least two percent of
the total number of parliamentary constituencies in India, any
fraction exceeding one-half being counted as one; and
(ii) the said candidates have been elected to that House from not less
than three States.
Today, The National parties are Indian National
Congress , Bharatiya Janata Party, Communist Party of India,
Communist Party of India (Marxist), Bahujan Samaj Party, and Janata
Dal. All these national parties try to garner votes on the basis of
caste, creed, religion,language etc. which is otherwise neither
advisable nor recommendable .
The last decade of the 20th century
saw a sharp rise in political mobilization on the basis of social
cleavages based on identities, in particular of religion and caste.
Castes’, communalism and personality domination have been the main
planks around which the fragmentation of political parties has taken
place, which has resulted in more caste and class-based political
violence in the society. Political parties have invariably exploited
these sentiments for gaining electoral support and political
mobilization of the voters. The coalition politics gained a new
trend. Some parties' started to lend support to Government from
outside without formally joining it, thus, it mean sharing power
without assuming any responsibility. Which goes against the
institution of democracy and its sanctity. Fear of party
disintegration has led many political leaders to worry about
preventing it from being reduced to the status of a State or regional
party. Strong leaders with support from their States have been by-
passed in favour of loyalists. Instances are galore when the party
presidents have appointed party chiefs in the States just before the
organizational elections were to take place. President of the party
was "authorized" to nominate a majority of the State party chiefs.
These trends are likely to boomerang on the party's strength and
capability.
A modern party is a public
institution, not a personal fief. Without intra-party elections,
without ministers who enjoy strong regional support, and without the
encouragement of a variety of opinions, political parties are like to
wither away.
Keeping in mind these facts now is time
to look for reforms in parties and proper legislation for them at each
stage and in each aspect like with regards to Fractionalization,
coalitions, Growing Violence, Trend of criminalization .A number of
academic and research Institutions, political observers and analysts,
Committees and Commissions appointed by the Government of India from
time to time and concerned scholars, journalists and academicians in
their individual capacities have made a number of proposals for
reforms in the party system in India. Some of the most significant of
these are culled here in order to provide a perspective for framing
recommendations for party reforms. for our readers According to Ex
President K R Narayanan, Political parties should ensure that
criminals are denied tickets for elections.
Center for Policy Research Study (Lok Raj Baral)
on party reforms (2000) recommended for reforming the first-past-the-
post system of election. The German model that accepts a preferential
voting system can be examined for insuring proportionate
representation of parties in parliament. Since all parties work in
tandem with unscrupulous business lobbies and gangsters or use state
power for determining the outcome of elections, these cancerous trends
need to be checked for good governance. Political parties should have
minimum principles for forming a coalition government rather than
forge alliances only to be in government. Unprincipled political
alignment should be discouraged by law urging political parties to be
more homogenous in their joint endeavors of running the coalition
government. Support to be rendered, to any government from "outside",
i.e. without joining the coalition government, should be legally
barred. Only a party having at least 25 per cent seats in the Lower
House of parliament or Assembly should have a chance to form the
government. No government should be removed from office if the
opposition parties or others involved in the toppling game fail to
come out with a clear alternative arrangement and program.
The kind of coalitional arrangements
that the parties make should be clear before forming the government.
Developments so far show that the big parties themselves prefer to
play second fiddle to the regional and smaller parties whose immediate
interests are determined by 'regional and parochial' issues rather
than long term national programes.Parties need to strengthen their
managerial and crisis management capacity. If the party organizations
are better managed and democratized, their efficiency would increase.
More autonomy to all layers and more inner-party democracy would help
circulate leaders on the basis of their qualities. The criterion of
achievement rather than ascription should be accepted by all parties.
Unless parties are broad based in accommodating all segments of
society, they continue to become status quoits, exclusivist, regional
and sectarian. Parties' own code of conduct and self-initiated
reforms, rather than state-imposed reforms are likely to improve the
working of parties. [Lok Raj Baral, "Political Parties and Governance
in South Asia" in V. A. Pai Panandikar, Problems of Governance in
South Asia ( Delhi, Konark Publishers Pvt. Ltd.,2000), pp. 155-199.]
The Iyer Committee recommended that a law
should ensure inner-party democracy in all political parties. It also
reiterated a legal sanction for proper audit and accounts. Besides it
proposed the institution of a Commissioner to examine and decide
whether a political party was promoting communalism or in any way
acting against the Constitution
Justice Kuldeep Singh Panel`s recommendations are, to
prevent criminalisation of politics, the candidates with a criminal
background or those facing substantial criminal charges framed
by a court be debarred from contesting elections. Just as government
servants facing criminal proceedings are placed under suspension until
cleared by the courts, the same yardstick should be applied to
politicians as well. Election Commission should bring effective
changes in the model code of conduct to exclude candidates from
contesting elections who have criminal proceedings pending against
them. And, if the Election Commission cannot do this, Parliament must
do it. More effective laws be created that will prevent criminals from
entering the political process. The legal reforms can push criminals
out of the system. New legal initiatives such as amendments in
Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act 1951 could empower
the Election Commission to deal with crime-tainted politicians. If we
cannot bar criminals from contesting elections until they are
convicted by the courts, then the next best course would be to get
speedy verdicts in their cases. Special courts and benches to try
cases against legislators and other high profile people should be set
up for speedy trials.
The measures suggested by various
committees and ECs only reflect a mechanist approach. The idea that
candidates who stand no chance of winning election through the
electoral process and are thus a nuisance is to take a narrow view of
the political process. The electoral arena is a training ground for
political participation. Even if the independent candidates file the
nomination and then withdraw it, or contest and then retire midway
through the campaign, they have done their job. Moreover,
unrestricted opportunity to contest is a virtue in itself even if it
serves no purpose. As for the multiplicity of candidates, the answer
would lie in strengthening the contingent arrangements of the election
machinery. Steps to discourage ‘dummy’ candidates are surely in
order. The recent experiment of denying facilities to those
candidates who have made public declarations to support another is a
useful step in that direction. It would be justified, perhaps
necessary, to ban the practice of a candidate contesting
simultaneously from more than one constituency of the same category.
(With Inputs from Advisory Panel On Electoral Reforms; Standards in
Political Life)
In this regard the efforts of Sanjeev
Sabhlok are worth mentioning. He is doing marvelous job to reform
party system in India, but not only in papers or blogs, but also doing
his best to deliver the same through his own party, nay, party of
people, by people for people. He was officer with Indian Government
till 2001 and served the Republic Of India in its various capacities
as, IAS officer of the batch 1982, His work includes among other,
Deputy Commissioner of Barpeta , Director Panchyat and rural
development Assam and many more. He is widely traveled, good economist
and author of many books on politics, economics and development. Most
sought after book is “breaking free of Nehru”. His latest work is for
India and Indian political system for this; he initiated the move and
established the Indian Policy Institute. Currently his able guidance
is being availed by Government of Victoria , Australia
All these efforts made either by GOI or individuals like Sanjeev
Sabhlok and other like minded persons or NGO`s will definitely change
the political system and day is not far when we will proudly be
governed by educated, liberal and non religious, non criminal
personalities and by ourselves, TO MAKE INDIA REAL DEMOCRATIC OR IN
MORE ACCURATE AND REAL WORDS, REAL RAMRAJ !
concluded its 15th general Lok Sabha Elections. Election period was
extended to over more then month and elections were held in five
phases. Now that the elections are over, results are already there and
we are seeing Dr. Manmohan Singh as our Prime Minister for the second
time in a row. Results clearly were in his and his party`s favor. This
time elections were held in presidential type like, we see in America.
Both major parties Indian National Congress and Bhartiya Janta Party
named there prime ministerial candidates in advance. INC named Dr.
Manmohan Singh and BJP named L.K.Advani. Both parties were major
parties in there respective groups i.e. United Progressive Alliance
(UPA) and National Democratic Alliance (NDA). With this, we can see
that electorate in India was having a clear choice between two. Which
also mean that India is coming back to two party norms once again. UPA
with its six allies and others got total of 262 seats, while congress
was winner in 206 seats, while NDA with its six parties in its fold
got only 157 seats while BJP the major party in group, on its own got
116. Rest of the seats were divided between third fronts led by left,
which got 80 seats and newly formed forth front ,comprising Lalu
Prasad Yadav`s RJD, Mulyam Singh`s SP and Ram Vilas Paswan`s party ,
27. Other smaller parties and independents got 17 seats across India.
Members of the Lok Sabha are elected in single-
member constituencies by the first-past-the-post system used in
parliamentary elections in the U.K. However, unlike in Britain, no
single party has won an overall parliamentary majority in a general
election in India since 1984. In 1984 however, Congress which at the
time had ruled India for all but three years since the attainment of
independence in 1947 - won a record landslide victory, following the
assassination of then Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi. but after
1989, Congress has been in and out of office, while BJP has emerged as
a formidable rival to the Congress Party. In the meantime, India,
which previously had a multi-party system with one dominant party -
namely Congress - developed a highly fractious party system
characterized by a proliferation of regional parties, which stands in
stark contrast with the two-party (or at least two-party dominant)
systems. Nonetheless, the outcome of this year's election, in which
Congress won 206 seats (up from 145 in 2004) constitutes the best
showing of any party since 1991, when a wave of sympathy following the
assassination of then-Congress leader and P.M. Rajiv Gandhi in the
middle of a general election allowed the party to capture 232 seats in
the Lok Sabha. Conversely, BJP had its worst result since 1991,
although the party remains by far the second largest in India.
In this context first we have to understand
the party or political party. Political parties are indispensable to
any democratic system and play the most crucial role in the electoral
process – in setting up candidates and conducting election campaigns.
The legal and constitutional position of political parties varies
from country to country. In most democratic countries, however, there
is neither any direct constitutional provision regulating the
functioning of political parties, nor any legal sanction establishing
political parties as a necessary governmental institution, although
there are some governmental systems which try to prescribe some
conditions for the operation of party system. French Republic,
prescribes that Parliament (The French National Assembly) cannot make
a law that may abridge the right of the political parties to carry on
their activities freely. This is perhaps a tacit recognition of the
existence of political parties as a sine qua non of a democratic
system. The Federal Government of Germany has thoroughly
institutionalized the structure of political parties, by introducing
the 5% clause, which makes it extremely difficult for minority or
splinter parties to form and flourish. The Law guarantees the
legitimacy of parties and their right to exist, if they accept the
principle of democratic government. The Canadian practice of
Registration of Party or Party foundation is very comprehensive.
Parties are registered on certain conditions and party leaders are
selected through a national leadership convention composed of
provincial party delegates voting as individuals.
But here in India, Political parties do not as
such find any direct mention in the Constitution of India. In the
absence of a sufficiently detailed constitutional provisions, the
major onus of framing and administering the rules and regulations
governing political parties in India has fallen on the Election
Commission, a constitutional body responsible for conduct of
elections. The Election Commission of India has the ultimate power
to accord recognition and status of political parties to “the
association or body of citizens of India". The Election Commission has
the power to decide whether or not to register an association or body
of individuals as a political party. To make Political party, it is
mandatory for any association or body of individuals of India calling
itself a political party to make an application to the Election
Commission for its registration as a political party, within thirty
days following the date of its formation. Major requirement with the
application is that it shall be accompanied by a copy of the
memorandum or rules and regulations of the association or body, by
whatever name called, and such memorandum or rules and regulations
shall contain a specific provision that the association or body shall
bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India, and to
the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy and would uphold
the sovereignty, unity and integrity and unity of India. The decision
of the Commission to give recognization as a political party is final
in this regard. The recognized political parties are accorded the
status of a National or State political party. In 1951 there were 14
National parties while presently there are 7 National political
parties. There were times when there was no national party at all,
These were at that time called multi-State parties!It was during 1962
and 1967. It may be noted that political parties in India are also
sometimes categorized by Educationists, Journalists ,observers,
academics and political analysts on the basis of their territorial or
geographical representation, such as: All India parties, Regional
parties and Local parties. This is done by them only as a matter of
convenience to argue a particular point, or identify them in a
particular way, and does not in any way reflect either any official
party classification recognized by the Government or by the Election
Commission. Similarly any identification of a party on the basis of
its ideological orientation as a party of the left, right, center,
socialist, communist, communalist or leader- centered etc. bears no
official recognition.
According to the Election Symbols (Reservation
and Allotment) Order, 1968, as recently amended, a political party
shall be treated as a recognized National party, if, and only if,
either
(A)
(i) the candidates set up by it, in any four or more States, at the
last general election to the House of the People, or to the
Legislative Assembly of the State concerned, have secured not less
than six percent of the total valid votes polled in their respective
States at that general election; and
(ii) in addition, it has returned at least four members to the House
of the People at the aforesaid last general election from any State or
States;
or
(B)
(i) its candidates have been elected to the House of the People, at
the last general election to that House, from at least two percent of
the total number of parliamentary constituencies in India, any
fraction exceeding one-half being counted as one; and
(ii) the said candidates have been elected to that House from not less
than three States.
Today, The National parties are Indian National
Congress , Bharatiya Janata Party, Communist Party of India,
Communist Party of India (Marxist), Bahujan Samaj Party, and Janata
Dal. All these national parties try to garner votes on the basis of
caste, creed, religion,language etc. which is otherwise neither
advisable nor recommendable .
The last decade of the 20th century
saw a sharp rise in political mobilization on the basis of social
cleavages based on identities, in particular of religion and caste.
Castes’, communalism and personality domination have been the main
planks around which the fragmentation of political parties has taken
place, which has resulted in more caste and class-based political
violence in the society. Political parties have invariably exploited
these sentiments for gaining electoral support and political
mobilization of the voters. The coalition politics gained a new
trend. Some parties' started to lend support to Government from
outside without formally joining it, thus, it mean sharing power
without assuming any responsibility. Which goes against the
institution of democracy and its sanctity. Fear of party
disintegration has led many political leaders to worry about
preventing it from being reduced to the status of a State or regional
party. Strong leaders with support from their States have been by-
passed in favour of loyalists. Instances are galore when the party
presidents have appointed party chiefs in the States just before the
organizational elections were to take place. President of the party
was "authorized" to nominate a majority of the State party chiefs.
These trends are likely to boomerang on the party's strength and
capability.
A modern party is a public
institution, not a personal fief. Without intra-party elections,
without ministers who enjoy strong regional support, and without the
encouragement of a variety of opinions, political parties are like to
wither away.
Keeping in mind these facts now is time
to look for reforms in parties and proper legislation for them at each
stage and in each aspect like with regards to Fractionalization,
coalitions, Growing Violence, Trend of criminalization .A number of
academic and research Institutions, political observers and analysts,
Committees and Commissions appointed by the Government of India from
time to time and concerned scholars, journalists and academicians in
their individual capacities have made a number of proposals for
reforms in the party system in India. Some of the most significant of
these are culled here in order to provide a perspective for framing
recommendations for party reforms. for our readers According to Ex
President K R Narayanan, Political parties should ensure that
criminals are denied tickets for elections.
Center for Policy Research Study (Lok Raj Baral)
on party reforms (2000) recommended for reforming the first-past-the-
post system of election. The German model that accepts a preferential
voting system can be examined for insuring proportionate
representation of parties in parliament. Since all parties work in
tandem with unscrupulous business lobbies and gangsters or use state
power for determining the outcome of elections, these cancerous trends
need to be checked for good governance. Political parties should have
minimum principles for forming a coalition government rather than
forge alliances only to be in government. Unprincipled political
alignment should be discouraged by law urging political parties to be
more homogenous in their joint endeavors of running the coalition
government. Support to be rendered, to any government from "outside",
i.e. without joining the coalition government, should be legally
barred. Only a party having at least 25 per cent seats in the Lower
House of parliament or Assembly should have a chance to form the
government. No government should be removed from office if the
opposition parties or others involved in the toppling game fail to
come out with a clear alternative arrangement and program.
The kind of coalitional arrangements
that the parties make should be clear before forming the government.
Developments so far show that the big parties themselves prefer to
play second fiddle to the regional and smaller parties whose immediate
interests are determined by 'regional and parochial' issues rather
than long term national programes.Parties need to strengthen their
managerial and crisis management capacity. If the party organizations
are better managed and democratized, their efficiency would increase.
More autonomy to all layers and more inner-party democracy would help
circulate leaders on the basis of their qualities. The criterion of
achievement rather than ascription should be accepted by all parties.
Unless parties are broad based in accommodating all segments of
society, they continue to become status quoits, exclusivist, regional
and sectarian. Parties' own code of conduct and self-initiated
reforms, rather than state-imposed reforms are likely to improve the
working of parties. [Lok Raj Baral, "Political Parties and Governance
in South Asia" in V. A. Pai Panandikar, Problems of Governance in
South Asia ( Delhi, Konark Publishers Pvt. Ltd.,2000), pp. 155-199.]
The Iyer Committee recommended that a law
should ensure inner-party democracy in all political parties. It also
reiterated a legal sanction for proper audit and accounts. Besides it
proposed the institution of a Commissioner to examine and decide
whether a political party was promoting communalism or in any way
acting against the Constitution
Justice Kuldeep Singh Panel`s recommendations are, to
prevent criminalisation of politics, the candidates with a criminal
background or those facing substantial criminal charges framed
by a court be debarred from contesting elections. Just as government
servants facing criminal proceedings are placed under suspension until
cleared by the courts, the same yardstick should be applied to
politicians as well. Election Commission should bring effective
changes in the model code of conduct to exclude candidates from
contesting elections who have criminal proceedings pending against
them. And, if the Election Commission cannot do this, Parliament must
do it. More effective laws be created that will prevent criminals from
entering the political process. The legal reforms can push criminals
out of the system. New legal initiatives such as amendments in
Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act 1951 could empower
the Election Commission to deal with crime-tainted politicians. If we
cannot bar criminals from contesting elections until they are
convicted by the courts, then the next best course would be to get
speedy verdicts in their cases. Special courts and benches to try
cases against legislators and other high profile people should be set
up for speedy trials.
The measures suggested by various
committees and ECs only reflect a mechanist approach. The idea that
candidates who stand no chance of winning election through the
electoral process and are thus a nuisance is to take a narrow view of
the political process. The electoral arena is a training ground for
political participation. Even if the independent candidates file the
nomination and then withdraw it, or contest and then retire midway
through the campaign, they have done their job. Moreover,
unrestricted opportunity to contest is a virtue in itself even if it
serves no purpose. As for the multiplicity of candidates, the answer
would lie in strengthening the contingent arrangements of the election
machinery. Steps to discourage ‘dummy’ candidates are surely in
order. The recent experiment of denying facilities to those
candidates who have made public declarations to support another is a
useful step in that direction. It would be justified, perhaps
necessary, to ban the practice of a candidate contesting
simultaneously from more than one constituency of the same category.
(With Inputs from Advisory Panel On Electoral Reforms; Standards in
Political Life)
In this regard the efforts of Sanjeev
Sabhlok are worth mentioning. He is doing marvelous job to reform
party system in India, but not only in papers or blogs, but also doing
his best to deliver the same through his own party, nay, party of
people, by people for people. He was officer with Indian Government
till 2001 and served the Republic Of India in its various capacities
as, IAS officer of the batch 1982, His work includes among other,
Deputy Commissioner of Barpeta , Director Panchyat and rural
development Assam and many more. He is widely traveled, good economist
and author of many books on politics, economics and development. Most
sought after book is “breaking free of Nehru”. His latest work is for
India and Indian political system for this; he initiated the move and
established the Indian Policy Institute. Currently his able guidance
is being availed by Government of Victoria , Australia
All these efforts made either by GOI or individuals like Sanjeev
Sabhlok and other like minded persons or NGO`s will definitely change
the political system and day is not far when we will proudly be
governed by educated, liberal and non religious, non criminal
personalities and by ourselves, TO MAKE INDIA REAL DEMOCRATIC OR IN
MORE ACCURATE AND REAL WORDS, REAL RAMRAJ !
Sanjeev Sabhlok
Jul 11, 2009, 5:55:31 AM7/11/09
to india-polic...@googlegroups.com
Thanks, Satinder
Welcome aboard.
This is the kind of article we need for IPU. I don't know if we need the last para. As general editor, I suppose I have the discretion to edit it out.
The question you asked me separately was: when is the next issue to be issued? Well, to me the question is: when do we have sufficient articles? Chicken and egg problem.
IPU has just started a couple of weeks go. It is currently planned as an occasional release. In other words, if material comes along (say three to four articles) we can publish it (I was thinking of publishing once in 3-4 months, or even once in 6 months, but there are no hard and fast rules).
We have 29 policy authors here (only authors are expected to join - no free riders please! ie. if you don't aim to write, please leave this group - that's said as politely as I can say it! - one has really no time to waste with people who want to hang around doing nothing; indeed if anyone on this group doesn't contribute anything after say, by 1 January 2010, I'll unsubscribe such persons and ban them from IPI as well), so I'm hoping everyone will contribute at least one article per year. That should give us at least 30 articles per year, and we can publish virtually every two months.
So I encourage everyone on this group to churn out articles for the next issue in right earnest.
Regards
Sanjeev--
sanjeev sabhlok
Skypeid: sanjeevsabhlok
http://sanjeev.sabhlokcity.com/
Welcome aboard.
This is the kind of article we need for IPU. I don't know if we need the last para. As general editor, I suppose I have the discretion to edit it out.
The question you asked me separately was: when is the next issue to be issued? Well, to me the question is: when do we have sufficient articles? Chicken and egg problem.
IPU has just started a couple of weeks go. It is currently planned as an occasional release. In other words, if material comes along (say three to four articles) we can publish it (I was thinking of publishing once in 3-4 months, or even once in 6 months, but there are no hard and fast rules).
We have 29 policy authors here (only authors are expected to join - no free riders please! ie. if you don't aim to write, please leave this group - that's said as politely as I can say it! - one has really no time to waste with people who want to hang around doing nothing; indeed if anyone on this group doesn't contribute anything after say, by 1 January 2010, I'll unsubscribe such persons and ban them from IPI as well), so I'm hoping everyone will contribute at least one article per year. That should give us at least 30 articles per year, and we can publish virtually every two months.
So I encourage everyone on this group to churn out articles for the next issue in right earnest.
Regards
Sanjeev
sanjeev sabhlok
Skypeid: sanjeevsabhlok
http://sanjeev.sabhlokcity.com/
Sanjeev Sabhlok
Jul 11, 2009, 6:07:52 AM7/11/09
to india-polic...@googlegroups.com
Dear Friends
Just added to the main page of the group:http://groups.google.com/group/india-policy-institute
Earlier: Please join this group if you wish to contribute articles.
New: Please join this group ONLY if you wish to contribute articles.
Also added: Please note that members who do not contribute anything within six months of joining (or by 1 January 2010 for those who have joined before 1 July 2009) will be unsubscribed and banned from this group.
I trust that makes everything clear re: why this group exists, and that it is not a place for hangers on! Let's try to make a difference by suggesting useful policies for policy makers - that's why you've joined this. So I trust no one will need to be unsubscribed/banned.
Regards
Sanjeev
Just added to the main page of the group:http://groups.google.com/group/india-policy-institute
Earlier: Please join this group if you wish to contribute articles.
New: Please join this group ONLY if you wish to contribute articles.
Also added: Please note that members who do not contribute anything within six months of joining (or by 1 January 2010 for those who have joined before 1 July 2009) will be unsubscribed and banned from this group.
I trust that makes everything clear re: why this group exists, and that it is not a place for hangers on! Let's try to make a difference by suggesting useful policies for policy makers - that's why you've joined this. So I trust no one will need to be unsubscribed/banned.
Regards
Sanjeev
satinder gambhir
Jul 11, 2009, 10:09:18 AM7/11/09
to India Policy Institute
Thanks Sir,
Sure ,
You are at liberty to cut the last phrase where the mention
of your name emerge in your capacity as editor and founder of IPI, FTI
and IPU. Actualy i was working on this subject for some time and it
is written for Rainbow Education Mirrorr with whom I am associated,so
I included the name of persons,commities etc. who are working on this
subject.
The very mention of both IPI and its founder will be
of great help to spread the word of FTI , IPI . As the IPI and FTI`s
purpose is almost same so I sent it here too. I have some more things
which are worth debateable at right forum and I think I got that
platform . I will change my thoughts into words and send, for other
esteem members to read and comment .
Rainbow is also a new venture and weekly paper, I have joined it
recently and my articles on Tourism, local problems etc were
published in its previous issues.
Thanks & Regards
On Jul 11, 2:55 pm, Sanjeev Sabhlok <sabh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Satinder
>
> Welcome aboard.
>
> This is the kind of article we need for IPU. I don't know if we need the
> last para. As general editor, I suppose I have the discretion to edit it
> out.
>
> The question you asked me separately was: when is the next issue to be
> issued? Well, to me the question is: when do we have sufficient articles?
> Chicken and egg problem.
>
> IPU has just started a couple of weeks go. It is currently planned as an
> occasional release. In other words, if material comes along (say three to
> four articles) we can publish it (I was thinking of publishing once in 3-4
> months, or even once in 6 months, but there are no hard and fast rules).
>
> We have 29 policy authors here (only authors are expected to join - no free
> riders please! ie. if you don't aim to write, please *leave *this group -
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sure ,
You are at liberty to cut the last phrase where the mention
of your name emerge in your capacity as editor and founder of IPI, FTI
and IPU. Actualy i was working on this subject for some time and it
is written for Rainbow Education Mirrorr with whom I am associated,so
I included the name of persons,commities etc. who are working on this
subject.
The very mention of both IPI and its founder will be
of great help to spread the word of FTI , IPI . As the IPI and FTI`s
purpose is almost same so I sent it here too. I have some more things
which are worth debateable at right forum and I think I got that
platform . I will change my thoughts into words and send, for other
esteem members to read and comment .
Rainbow is also a new venture and weekly paper, I have joined it
recently and my articles on Tourism, local problems etc were
published in its previous issues.
Thanks & Regards
On Jul 11, 2:55 pm, Sanjeev Sabhlok <sabh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Satinder
>
> Welcome aboard.
>
> This is the kind of article we need for IPU. I don't know if we need the
> last para. As general editor, I suppose I have the discretion to edit it
> out.
>
> The question you asked me separately was: when is the next issue to be
> issued? Well, to me the question is: when do we have sufficient articles?
> Chicken and egg problem.
>
> IPU has just started a couple of weeks go. It is currently planned as an
> occasional release. In other words, if material comes along (say three to
> four articles) we can publish it (I was thinking of publishing once in 3-4
> months, or even once in 6 months, but there are no hard and fast rules).
>
> We have 29 policy authors here (only authors are expected to join - no free
> that's said as politely as I can say it! - one has really no time to waste
> with people who want to hang around doing nothing; indeed if anyone on this
> group doesn't contribute anything after say, by 1 January 2010, I'll
> unsubscribe such persons and ban them from IPI as well), so I'm hoping
> everyone will contribute at least one article per year. That should give us
> at least 30 articles per year, and we can publish virtually every two
> months.
>
> So I encourage everyone on this group to churn out articles for the next
> issue in right earnest.
>
> Regards
> Sanjeev
>
> On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 6:58 PM, satinder gambhir <satindergamb...@gmail.com
> with people who want to hang around doing nothing; indeed if anyone on this
> group doesn't contribute anything after say, by 1 January 2010, I'll
> unsubscribe such persons and ban them from IPI as well), so I'm hoping
> everyone will contribute at least one article per year. That should give us
> at least 30 articles per year, and we can publish virtually every two
> months.
>
> So I encourage everyone on this group to churn out articles for the next
> issue in right earnest.
>
> Regards
> Sanjeev
>
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages