ताकतवर ही सबसे भ्रष्ट …!

हमारे यहां सबसे शक्तिशाली समूह राजनीतिज्ञों का है। भ्रष्टाचार जैसी बीमारी को दूर करने का काम केवल राजनैतिक इच्छाशक्ति से ही हो सकता है। लेकिन सवाल यह है कि आखिर हमारा राजनीतिक सिस्टम इसमें पहल क्यों नहीं करता? इसका जवाब इन आंकड़ों में है : हमारे यहां दागी सांसदों की संख्या जहां 2004 में 43 प्रतिशत थी, वहीं यह 2019 में बढ़कर 43 फीसदी हो गई। इनमें भी सबसे ज्यादा संख्या सत्ताधारी पार्टी में है। हाल ही में बिहार में हुए चुनाव में दागी विधायकों की संख्या में 10 फीसदी की बढ़ोतरी हुई है। 2015 में जहां चुने हुए विधायकों में से 58 फीसदी पर आपराधिक मामले दर्ज थे, वहीं 2020 में यह संख्या बढ़कर 68 फीसदी हो गई। हमारे जनप्रतिनिधियों के दागी होने का मतलब यही है कि जब उनका दामन साफ नहीं होगा तो वे भ्रष्टाचार को दूर करने का प्रयास क्यों करेंगे, क्योंकि व्यवस्था में भ्रष्टाचार ही इन्हें अपने कारनामों को ढंकने मंे मदद करता है।

तो नागरिक क्या कर सकते हैं?

“ग्लोबल करप्शन बैरोमीटर’ रिपोर्ट कहती हैं कि हमारे यहां 46 फीसदी लोगों ने अपने संपर्कों के जरिए अपने काम करवाए। इनमें से अधिकांश काम छोटे-बड़े नेताओं के जरिए ही करवाए जाते हैं। अगर ये नेता मदद नहीं करते तो उस काम के लिए उन्हें रिश्वत देनी पड़ती। यानी यहां लोगों को यह समझने की जरूरत है कि राजनीतिज्ञ इतने शक्तिशाली हैं कि अगर वे चाहें तो वे पूरे सिस्टम को बदल सकते हैं। अब यह आम नागरिकों की जिम्मेदारी है कि वे नेता ही ऐसे चुनेें जिनकी ईमानदारी और निष्ठा तमाम सवालों से परे हो। अगर राजनीति ईमानदार होगी तो नौकरशाही को अपने आप ईमानदार होना होगा। शीर्ष नौकरशाह जब ईमानदार होंगे तो निचले स्तर पर कार्य करने वाले कर्मचारी भ्रष्टाचार करने का साहस नहीं कर पाएंगे। जब नेता ईमानदार होगा, अफसर ईमानदार होंगे, कर्मचारी ईमानदार होंगे तो आम लोगों में भी वे लोग जो अपने गलत काम भी पैसे देकर या जुगाड़ से करवा लेते हैं, उनके लिए यह सबकुछ इतना आसान नहीं रह जाएगा।

लेकिन यह होगा कैसे?

जनता ईमानदार नेता चुनें, यह कहना आसान है, लेकिन करना मुश्किल। इसके लिए हमें कुछ बुनियादी बदलाव करने होंगे। इलेक्टोरल बॉड्स को बंद करके राजनीतिक दलों को होने वाली फंडिंग में पारदर्शिता लानी होगी। आपराधिक रिकॉर्ड वाले लागों को चुनाव का टिकट देने पर रोक लगानी होगी और किसी दागी को टिकट देने पर संबंधित राजनीतिक दल के मुखिया को जिम्मेदार ठहराना होगा। इसके लिए सिविल सोसाइटी का दबाव बनाना होगा और जब भी जरूरत हो, कोर्ट का दरवाजा खटखटाने से भी नहीं पीछे नहीं रहना होगा। इसके लिए मीडिया को भी अहम भूमिका निभानी होगी।

कहां है समस्या?

- कुछ साल पहले एक जाने-माने राजनेता ने कहा था कि चुनावी फंडिंग ही भ्रष्टाचार की सबसे बड़ी गंगोत्री है। इससे निबटने के लिए सरकार इलेक्टोरल बॉन्ड्स लेकर आई, लेकिन इसने तो चुनावी फंडिंग को और भी अस्पष्ट और अपारदर्शी बना दिया है। दरअसल, हमारे राजनीतिज्ञ राजनीतिक फंडिंग में पारदर्शिता बिल्कुल नहीं चाहते। यह बात कुछ कारपोरेट्स हाउसेस को भी रास आती है, क्योंकि इससे वे बड़ी आसानी से राजनीतिक दलों को पैसा दे देते हैं और चुनावों के बाद सरकार से बेजा फायदा उठाते हैं।

- भ्रष्टाचार से निबटने के लिए हमें प्रभावी सीबीआई, सीवीसी और एंटी करप्शन ब्यूरो चाहिए। लेकिन इन सभी विभागों का मूल संगठन यानी पुलिस के बारे में आम धारणा यही है कि यह सबसे भ्रष्ट विभाग है। इसलिए हम पुलिस से और प्रकारांतर में इन तमाम संगठनों से यह उम्मीद नहीं कर सकते कि ये भ्रष्टाचार को मिटाने में कारगर रहेंगे, जब तक कि इनके पीछे राजनीतिक इच्छाशक्ति नहीं होगी।

- सरकारी सेवकों को भी जवाबदेह नहीं बनाया गया है। सरकारी शिक्षक स्कूल नहीं जाते हैं या जाते हैं तो पढ़ाते नहीं। डॉक्टर सरकारी हास्पिटल या प्राथमिक स्वास्थ्य केंद्र नहीं जाते। अस्पतालों में दवाइयां नहीं मिलती। सड़के, जलापूर्ति, बिजली और अन्य बुनियादी सुविधाओं की स्थिति अक्सर खराब मिलती है। और दुर्भाग्य से किसी को भी खराब काम करने या जिम्मेदारी न निभाने पर नौकरी से नहीं निकाला जाता। समस्या यह है कि अच्छा काम करने वाले को पुरस्कार भी नहीं मिलता। तो अच्छा काम करने की प्रेरणा भी नहीं मिलती।

केरल और बिहार के सबक …

एक रिपोर्ट के अनुसर केरल में केवल 10 फीसदी नागरिकों को अपने काम करवाने के लिए रिश्वत देनी पड़ी, जबकि बिहार में 75 फीसदी लोगों को। आखिर ऐसा क्यों है, इसको लेकर तो व्यापक अध्ययन की जरूरत है, लेकिन इसमें कहीं न कहीं शिक्षा और साक्षरता का योगदान तो नजर आता ही है। केरल भारत का सबसे साक्षर प्रदेश है, जबकि बिहार का नाम साक्षरता के मामले में नीचे से शीर्ष के राज्यों में शुमार होता है।

Originally published in Dainik Bhaskar.

The Indian electoral rolls are once again in the news. The government wants to prepare a single roll for national, state and local elections to municipalities and panchayats. Currently, many states have separate rolls. One is maintained by the Central Election Commission (CEC) and used for the Lok Sabha and state assembly elections; the other is maintained by the respective State Election Commissions (SECs) and used for local elections. The issue has been discussed for a few decades; some Commissions have recommended it; a few states have already done it.

In principle, this is a good idea. The problem lies in the details. Electoral rolls of either type are not fully correct. There are errors of commission, when names that should not be there are included; there are errors of omission, where names are missing. It is impossible to estimate this, but pilot field surveys show that in urban areas these errors could be quite large. Both the CEC and SECs are constantly working on removing these errors and some progress has been made.

The recent pandemic has thrown up yet another variable to contend with, the millions of migrants. Where do they vote? Typically, elections are held in the summer when schools are closed. This is also the peak time for seasonal migration, for lack of agricultural work at this time of year. There are a large number of students who study in other cities and towns. There is also a sizeable white-collar urban migrant population, who go to other places for jobs. There has been some discussion of remote voting for all these groups. The administrative arrangements need to be worked out. However, voter ID fraud cannot be ignored, but it is beyond the issue of single electoral rolls.

The stated purpose of this exercise is to hold simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha, state assemblies and local elections. There is some election or the other almost every year in some part of the country, including by-elections, when seats fall vacant on the death of a representative or when s/he defects. Many states do not hold local elections at all for many years. Also, what do we do if a government falls? Several practical, legal and constitutional issues have to be sorted out.

Ignoring all this, the issue of single electoral rolls can still be considered. Most voters are not concerned about it as long as their name is included. Whether they actually vote on the day is another matter. There are two issues that are linked to this. One is the use of technology, especially the biometric ID Aadhaar, or something similar. The other is the CAA and NRC issue. Will people with voter IDs and names on electoral rolls be left out of the NRC register? Or vice versa? Will this end up in courts with aggrieved persons and groups asking for justice? Privacy and data security are also important. The information sits on the cloud and can potentially be hacked. Could an enemy country or some group with vested interests use this to their advantage? We already hear reports of this in other countries.

We also need to ask a simple question. The country is still facing massive health and economic upheavals due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Earlier, we had groups of people protesting for or against the CAA and NRC. In this situation, even if we decide that single voter rolls are worth it, we need to think whether this is the right time. Ironing out all the problems, some of which have been outlined earlier, will take time, money and effort. Implementation glitches may lead to legal challenges or public protests. At a national level, some legal or even constitutional changes may be necessary to persuade states to mandatorily follow a common electoral roll. Simultaneous elections will require political management. Is this the most pressing issue of the day? Aren’t resources of time, money and the government bureaucracy better utilised trying to shepherd the nation out of the biggest crisis we face today?

The article was originally published in India Today.

लोकतंत्र में राजनीति और चुनावों में पैसे की भूमिका बढ़ती जा रही है। कई रिपोर्टों में सामने आया कि 2019 के चुनावों में अमरीकी राष्ट्रपति चुनाव से ज्यादा पैसा खर्च हुआ। इससे लोकतंत्र, चुनाव और नागरिकों पर क्या प्रभाव पड़ता है, वह जानने के लिए चुनावों के तीन महत्वपूर्ण घटक मतदाता, राजनीतिक दल और चुनावों में चंदा देने वालों के उद्देश्यों को समझना होगा। मतदाता सुशासन चाहते है। वे चाहते है कि कर के रूप में वे सरकार को जो पैसा देते हैं, उसका उपयोग सरकार नीति निर्माण और उन सेवाओं की बेहतरी के लिए करें।

राजनीतिक दलों का सत्ता में आना ही लक्ष्य होता है। जो लोग चंदा देते है, वे चाहते हैं कि जीतने के बाद उन्हें फायदा मिले। चंदा देने वाले लोग या तो किसी प्रकार की कानूनी जांच से बचे रहने के इरादे से चंदा देते हैं या वे कहते है कि पार्टियों ने उनसे जोर जबरदस्ती से चंदा लिया है। कुछ ही ऐसे है, जो जन कल्याण के कार्यों के लिए पार्टी को चंदा देते है। कुछ प्रतिष्ठित एजेंसियों ने सार्वजनिक स्तर पर जो आंकड़े उपलब्ध करवाए हैं, उनसे ज्ञात होता हैं कि 2019 के लोकसभा चुनावों में 50 हजार करोड़ रूपए से ज्यादा खर्चा हुआ था। सवाल है कि ये पैसा आता कहां से है ? राष्ट्रिय दलों द्वारा आधिकारिक तौर पर घोषित आय का आकलन करें तो पाएंगे कि 2004 से लेकर 2019 के बीच सभी राजनीतिक दलों की कुल आय 11 हजार करोड़ रूपए ही थी, फिर बाकि खर्च कैसे मैनेज हुआ ? राजनीतिक पार्टियां सिर्फ और सिर्फ अगले चुनाव के लिए चंदा जुटाने में लगी रहती हैं।

मौजूदा स्थिति को तीन चरणों में समझा जा सकता है। पहला, राजनीतिक दलों द्वारा बताए गए चंदा उगाही के आंकड़ों में वृद्धि देखी गई। 2013-14 के आम चुनाव से पहले यह राशि 1,500 करोड़ से थोड़ी ज्यादा थी। 2018-19  तक ये 6,400 करोड़ हो गई। कुछ पैसा अघोषित भी हो सकता है। दूसरा, लोकसभा में आपराधिक पृष्ठभूमि के सांसदों की संख्या 2009 की 21 से 2019 में 43 फीसदी हो गई। तीसरा, आपराधिक रिकॉर्ड वाले धनी उम्मीदवारों के चुनाव जीतने की संभावना मध्यमवर्गीय ईमानदार उम्मीदवारों के मुकाबले ज्यादा होती है।

अन्य देशों में राजनीतिक दलों की फंडिंग को लेकर अधिक पारदर्शिता होती है। देश के कुछ कॉर्पोरेट हाउस अक्सर जांच के घेरे में रहते है और वे राजनीतिक पार्टियों के भी करीबी हैं। ऐसे आरोप भी लगते है कि पार्टियां इन व्यावसायिक घरानों को फायदा पहुंचाती है। चूंकि पुलिस और सीबीआई राजनीतिक दलों के प्रभाव में होते है। इसलिए दोषियों के खिलाफ कार्रवाई होने की संभावना भी नगण्य रह जाती है। इस सम्पूर्ण ‘व्यवस्था’ में लोक कल्याण की नीतियां और बजट आवंटन भी प्रभावित होता है। सामाजिक क्षेत्र के व्यय में कटौती हो जाती है। इस बीच, ब्याज दरों में कटौती और आयकर में छूट संबंधी उपायों का फायदा भी कॉर्पोरेट घरानों को मिलता है। मान लीजिए, एक सेवानिवृत व्यक्ति ने यदि बचत के लिए फिक्स डिपोजिट करवा रखा है, तो ब्याज दर कम होने से उसका अच्छा खासा नुकसान हो जाएगा। दूसरी ओर कर्ज में डूबे व्यावसायिक घरानों को ब्याज दर कम होते ही लाखों का फायदा हो सकता है।

पिछले 15 वर्षों से राजनीतिक दलों की भरसक कोशिश रही है कि मतदाताओं को चुनावी फंडिंग के बारे में पता न चले। चुनावी बॉन्ड इसी कोशिश का व्यापक रूप है। स्वस्थ लोकतंत्र का तकाजा है कि राजनीतिक दल स्वत: प्रेरणा से अपनी आय और संपत्ति का सही ब्यौरा सार्वजनिक करें और विश्व के समक्ष मिसाल कायम करें।

First we need to understand why this is happening. The answer is simple: the primary goal of political parties is to capture power, and they use all the means at their disposal to obtain power. Power brings money, privileges, and control of the treasury. The total budgeted expenditure of the Central government for 2019-20 is ₹27.86 lakh crore. So, the stakes are high.

Political parties in power are supposed to deliver good governance and serve the public, but
usually power becomes an end in itself. The fact that more and more freebies are being
provided nowadays clearly shows that public funds are being used by those in power to lure
voters, and are not necessarily being used for public service.

Let us look at a few important ways in which the power game is played out in India. In Delhi, hate speeches delivered by a few members of a political party did not help that party come to power. But that is not the issue — in another State, in another election, this tactic may work.

There are two factors that strengthen the growing deterioration in the quality of campaigns. One is the rapidly increasing criminalisation of politics. In 2019, the Lok Sabha had 43% MPs with a criminal record, up from about 23% in 2004. Political parties that give tickets to such candidates are directly responsible for this. The other factor is the widespread use of social media to spread fake news during an election campaign. Most of what is online consists of abuse of rivals and vilification of Opposition parties.
Money also fuels much of what we see today. It was money that was responsible for the defections in Karnataka in 2019, and in Madhya Pradesh recently. The practice of whisking away MLAs to distant resorts to prevent them from being lured away by the Opposition is unique to India. Who is elected or which party wins does not seem to matter any longer. In this game, those with money and the ability to engineer defections can always come to power.

Two factors contribute to this open use of money to topple governments. One is the total lack of transparency in the funding of political parties. Electoral bonds have made it even more difficult to trace the source of funds of political parties. The second is that political parties in power have complete hold over law and order. A corporate scamster is arrested when the money trail is discovered, but no effort is taken to trace the money trail during massive defections.
Good governance needs democracy. But today, hardly any political party in India is internally democratic. They are fully controlled by a small ruling clique. Finances are raised and used in a completely opaque way. The situation is ripe for a small group of enterprising persons to raise funds and capture power and then exercise it without accountability. The use of muscle and money power makes re-elections possible. Parties that try to win power based on a track record of good governance show mixed results.

Consequences

So, we have the root cause of the problem: the goal of political power without adequate transparency and accountability. Before we come to the remedies, we need to understand the consequences of the system we have today. All governments, whether Central or State, are in financial difficulty. More than 25% of the Central Budget is spent on paying interest on money borrowed by the government. Then there is deficit financing. The Central government has made efforts to bring it down, but has not been able to meet its targets. India’s fiscal deficit is among the highest in the developing world, with the IMF estimating it to be 7.5% of the GDP in 2019. State government finances are worse: a substantial amount is spent on salaries and pensions. Then we have the huge problem in the financial sector with banks, non-banking financial companies and ILFS going almost into liquidation. That means that a lot of the public’s money is either gone or is under great risk. Is there a link between the use of election funds and non-performing assets in banks? Other manifestations of these problems are an increasing number of government scams; corruption; growing fear and insecurity; average or poor governance, including public services provided by the government; and rising unemployment. How can we really expect good services for the taxes we pay if 43% of MPs have criminal cases against them?

The way forward

India needs a system that throws up parties and politicians whose primary goal is public service, not power. Mahatma Gandhi suggested a way: “Democracy is an impossible thing until power is shared by all… Even … a labourer, who makes it possible for you to earn your living, will have his share in self-government.”
That goal of having enlightened politicians who feel answerable to the people is perhaps distant. For now, we need democratic, accountable and transparent political parties. We need to check the use of muscle and money power. Politicians in the ruling party are rarely, if ever, arrested, and old cases against them are even withdrawn. Sometimes no action is taken against those making hate speeches. Only rival politicians are targeted. This shows that the police follows the orders of their political masters. Therefore, police reforms are required. As a quick fix for misuse of money power and engineered defections, a forensic audit by an independent agency should be mandatory when MLAs defect to other parties. As the famous Watergate dictum goes, we need to “follow the money”. That alone can restore public confidence in democracy.
Above all, we need political party reforms that make parties transparent, accountable and democratic. But we are in a logjam: those who can reform the system do not want to. Voters are no doubt getting educated rapidly, but they are not in a position to bring about inner change in the electoral and political system merely through voting. Some kind of citizen action to raise awareness may be required. Otherwise things will have to get worse before they get better.

The article was originally published on The Hindu.

Engineering defections has become an accepted way of running politics, with the bizarre spectacle of MLAs being held captive in expensive 5 star deluxe resorts for weeks. Who pays for this and why? Are our MLAs so untrustworthy that they have to be kept captive? How then can we trust them in the Assembly?

The cost will be borne by the people of Karnataka, the Election Commission and the government and not the defectors. We need to note that funds spent by the Election Commission and the government are people’s money raised through taxes. A lot of time and effort have been wasted that could have been used for productive purposes.

An overburdened Supreme Court with a huge backlog of cases has spent time on this. Work slowed down during the transition from one government to the other. Regular work suffers, a code of conduct comes into play and government decisions are delayed.

The Election Commission estimates that Rs 30 crore will be spent on the bypolls alone. In addition to this, candidates and political parties are spending a huge amount of money as this has become a prestige issue. Where is this money coming from? Will it be spent only for winning or for giving a better government?

Meanwhile, Bengaluru’s roads and Metro construction continue to cause traffic jams affecting thousands of people daily. Lakes are breaching and flooding homes and governance has taken a back seat.

Not only in Bengaluru, but elsewhere as well, because the leaders are focussing on the upcoming bypolls.

However, the 15 MLAs who defected have gained. The total assets of these defecting MLAs has gone up by Rs 234 crore in one year. How did their assets go up so much in such a short span of time? Will there be any investigation or will it depend on which party comes to power post the elections? Is this justified?

There are issues that go beyond the letter of the law.

Has democracy won? Should those responsible for causing so much disruption be asked to pay and be held accountable?

In the Mahabharata, the Rishi Vaishampayana says, “For the sake of a family, a member may be sacrificed”.  Individual rights of ordinary citizens, for instance, are curtailed when buildings and homes are demolished for road widening. Similarly, for the sake of society, the individual right to defect from a party must be weighed against the greater public good. Ideally, a defector should wait till the term of the government is over or resign but not be allowed to recontest.

If we let them resign, they should give a sworn affidavit in a prescribed format explaining to the people why they resigned, why they joined a new party and so on. Submitting a false affidavit is in any case a criminal offence.

As a routine, their finances should be investigated on defection. When voters reject such politics and candidates, things will change. Democracy cannot be used to derive private benefit at public cost.

The above article was originally published in The New Indian Express.

Objections were overruled and the scheme was passed in the Lok Sabha as part of the Finance Bill so that it would not have to go through the Rajya Sabha where the then-government lacked a majority. There is no other country in the world where such a scheme exists.

Need for funds

But first, why is this important? The main reason is that in the 21st century, money plays an increasingly larger role in elections. This was not so about 50 years ago. Today, India spends more on elections than the U.S. with a per capita GDP that is 3% of the U.S. Today, having more money does not guarantee success, but, at the other extreme, having no money certainly guarantees defeat. Some party may win a one-off election by spending very little, but sustaining victory over several elections requires funds. To reach voters, candidates and parties use hoardings and advertisements on printed, electronic and social media. They hold election rallies. They travel and have to pay party workers. In India, there is the added expenditure of buying votes through distribution of gifts, money, liquor and so on.

Given that money is required, a central issue is whether a winning candidate or party will work for the public or for those who have funded them. So, some countries have public funding of elections. Campaign funding laws and reforms are a constantly evolving subject internationally. They focus on public funding, limits on expenditure, limits on donations, transparency in funding and penalties for non-compliance.

We need to look at the issue of electoral bonds in this context — the importance and need for funding, and proper laws. Even a glance at the best international laws and rules shows that we in India are lagging far behind. The gaps between the stated purpose of the electoral bonds scheme and the letter of law are glaring, and several articles in the media have pointed them out. The voter does not know who is funding whom through electoral bonds. This is supposed to protect the donors from harassment from the authorities.

However, such harassment is always by the party in power through law enforcement agencies — police, the Central Bureau of Investigation, the Intelligence Bureau, the Enforcement Directorate and so on. The simple remedy is to stop such motivated actions. However, the bank knows the purchaser of the bonds as well as the party that cashed it. The law agencies can obtain this information whenever they want. Can the ruling party use this to demand donations for itself, prevent donations to others, and use the law enforcement agencies to harass those who donate to rival parties? There is nothing in the electoral bonds scheme or existing laws to prevent this from happening. Equally troublesome, donation limits have been removed. In theory, a large corporate could buy the government using electoral bonds. This would not be possible in any other country. India continues to have spending limits but, as everyone knows, hardly any winning candidate sticks to it.

It is true that black money cannot be used to buy electoral bonds. However, black money can be used outside the scheme during elections. The reduction in cash donations from ₹20,000 to ₹2,000 is not good enough. There are parties with hundreds of crores of declared income who claim that all the funds were received from small cash donations of ₹100 or less. This cannot be prevented by merely reducing the cash limits. Meanwhile, we see reports that the ₹2,000 notes printed after demonetisation are being hoarded. Whether this will be used as black money and in elections is unknown. In short, electoral bonds cannot eliminate black money. There are other provisions in the electoral bonds scheme and the amended Finance Act, 2017. All of them were there earlier as well.

No doubt, there have been protests from the Opposition parties and from civil society. Political parties are sometimes seen as lacking credibility as they protest when they don’t get money but keep quiet when they get funds. Civil society is seen as anti-establishment. In India it is possible for those in power to ignore all this. However, we are missing the elephant in the room. We don’t need an incentive to be transparent and honest. Any political party can voluntarily choose to disclose its funds and sources. There is no law that prevents them from doing so. They can also state publicly that they will henceforth not use black money. No party has done this. Perhaps there are some compulsions under which they function — whether as the ruling party or as the Opposition.

Setback to democracy

Before we move to possible remedies, let us clearly look at the effect of the electoral bonds scheme and possible long-term implications. The ruling party gets nearly all the funds. It, along with the enforcement agencies, knows who has given how much money to whom. The public does not have this information. How can we have good democracy in secrecy? The real danger, however, is long-term. If big money entirely funds elections in an opaque way, democracy as we know it will not exist. Meanwhile, registrations are cancelled for NGOs but not for political parties. What is democracy without free speech and dissent, especially against the powerful?

Various commissions, including the Election Commission, have given detailed recommendations on suitable remedies. But, to date, no government has acted on them. We also need to benchmark ourselves against the best international practices and laws on campaign funding. Details are many, but there are a few simple principles for such remedies. First is complete transparency in all funding. Second, political parties need to be under the Right to Information Act. The Central Information Commission ruled that they were, but the parties refuse to follow its directions. There must be spending limits as well as donation limits, especially in a highly unequal society like ours, and strict penalties for flouting rules and the law. Public funding needs to be examined and introduced with proper checks and balances.

Voters need to demand changes and we need voter awareness campaigns. The simple message from voters to political parties could be “we like you, not your big money. If you want, we will all pitch in and give small individual donations.” If voters reject candidates and parties that overspend or bribe them, we would have moved democracy one level higher. Most important, the electoral bonds scheme needs to be scrapped. The Supreme Court is hearing a petition on this issue. Let us hope Indian democracy survives without going through another crisis.

**This article was originally published in The Hindu.