2014 witnessed the general elections, which put the BJP at
the zenith point in Indian politics. The general elections were followed by
assembly elections in major states like Jammu and Kashmir, Haryana, etc. Also
let’s add UP and Delhi assembly elections to the bandwagon. During the general
elections, the electronic, social and the print media clamoured around the halo
effect of Narendra Modi. The point here is to make the voters aware of the huge
difference between the nature as well as the ‘necessity’ of parliamentary
elections and the assembly elections. India is a ‘union of states’ and the
federal structure takes care of the centre-state relations. Now that the social
media has become all pervasive in nature, and the news channels being 24*7
medium, there is this constant quest for new stuff. Elections provide ample
substance to these news channels, which prey on them through exit polls, news
hour debates, etc.
Whenever there is an assembly election taking place in a
particular state, the various aspects and paradigms of that state, which are
indigenous factors, are showcased and brought to the forefront by the media. In
states such as UP and Bihar, the elections get a lot of mileage and coverage
(not only due to the huge no of seats) due to the varied nature of demography.
Then you have the sensitive state of Jammu and Kashmir, which elicits a
conflict between nationalistic and separist sentiments. Coming to the south,
you have the state of Tamil Nadu, which accentuates the indelible poignant
issue of ‘hindi’ to the forefront. Maharashtra has ‘Hindutva’ issue lingering
in its pipeline.
As illustrated above, the politics in every state is driven
by a ‘cause’ or a political ideology of the political parties and the voting
pattern is subservient to either of them. One evening, as I was sitting in my
living room and watching TV, many news channels were covering even states like
Himachal Pradesh elections intensively. It was an eye opener for me since many
unknown aspects were being discussed which played a major role in the
elections. This brings into the picture the unfathomable agenda of bifurcating
the assembly elections from the parliamentary elections in Odisha. The only
justifiable reason for the simultaneous elections would be that of curtailing
state expenditure since elections are costly affairs.
The state of Odisha has always been seen condescendingly, as
a land of destitute and poverty. The squiggles of a precocious nature, viz the
super cyclone, the pertinent floods, the ‘red menace’ keep the state in the
news (all for the wrong reasons). For every person who resides outside Odisha,
assuaging such unscrupulous embargo is a big ordeal. How does one explain the
fact that Odisha is not all about floods, tribal people and naxalites, but it’s
much more than that. How does one explain the wide roads and the glittering
street lamps in Bhubaneswar that can make any Mumbaikar or a Delhite envious? How does one explain the huge pool of talented
youth, who are exemplifying excellence in each and every sphere?
So how does bifurcating the elections help in subsiding
these prejudices? When assembly elections take place, it provides the quintessential
fodder to the ‘watering news channels’, which in turn draws the attention of
the entire nation towards the state. Many MLAs and MPs, highly educated with a
real purpose to serve the society, have been working incessantly for the
upliftment of the masses. All such people deserve equal recognition, as the
politicians of other major states. The
election coverage by major news channel will inevitably portray the real
picture at the grass root level; the issues(poverty, religion, caste) and the
ideology(secularism, radicalism) on which elections are fought, thus ‘selecting
the grain from the chaff’. Naveen Patnaik has the mandate of the people since
the last 15 years, but his popularity has been slackened of late by the coal
scam, chit fund scam, etc. Many of his
Ministers have been nabbed by the CBI sleuths. The coal scam (which came to
light before the 2014 elections) obliterated the Congress party at the centre,
but failed to touch Patnaik. The reason may be multifold- the plethora of
welfare schemes (using the central funds), or the ‘money power’ used during the
elections (the reason given by the opposition), or the lack of a credible
opposition. A vibrant democracy means that the people should have ‘options’ to
choose from, but here in Odisha, the opposition has been completely decimated
by the shrewdness of the ruling party.( The Leader of Opposition in the house
joined BJD days before the elections)
Hence the nation should get to know the real reasons behind
BJD’s success in the state. The state shouldn’t get obscured by simultaneous
assembly and parliamentary elections. By conducting the elections
simultaneously, the ‘real Odisha’ is prohibited to come to the cynosure. People
get confused and vote for the same party in both the forms, which produces far
reaching implications. BJD being a non-UPA and non-NDA party, won 20 out of 21
parliamentary seats. This huge margin makes no rationale at the national level
and hence peoples’ voting pattern should be based upon a clear demarcation of
state and national consequences. To have
a credible opposition, BJP and Congress should start taking Odisha seriously,
since a major chunk of 21 seats can make a significant difference. And from
peoples ‘perspective, democracy in its pristine form may prevail.
No comments:
Post a Comment