April 10, 2014
INDIA: Election but a ritual in nation lacking rule of law
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) congratulates the people of India for their participation to elect the 16th Lok
Sabha. The process has attracted, as usual, considerable media attention across the world. Media claims the process to
be 'the largest democratic exercise of the world.' Contestants are in what may be termed as a lobbying overdrive. Many
are touting maintenance of law and order as priority. None of the contestants have, however, emphasised the importance
of the rule of law.
Law and order and the rule of law are terms used interchangeably in India. This is because not many citizens and this
includes academics and social activists know the true meaning of the two terms. Law and order and the rule of law are
two completely different concepts.
Law and order can be established without the rule of law. Emphasis on enforcing the law and on maintaining order
justifies draconian legislations like the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958. It legitimises armed forces of the
Indian state being provided impunity to silence all forms of dissent. The concept negates the premise of equality before
the law. Emphasis on law and order nurtures dictatorial aspirations in seats of power. Dictators like Hitler sold ideas
of law and order to citizens to usurp absolute power.
The concept of the rule of law, on the other hand, demands equality before law. The rule of law warrants supremacy of
justice institutions. The concept demands the promulgation of just laws, and open processes for implementation of such
laws, wherein an independent judiciary working within the parameters of the rule of law decides disputes. In a rule of
law state decision makers have but a narrow window of discretion, and that too within a framework. This reiterates the
principle of equality before law, one that makes no distinctions between decision makers and citizens.
Unfortunately a debate that delineates the divergent implication of maintaining rule of law and maintaining law and
order is not yet rooted in India. Political parties emphasise the arming of police and other law enforcement agencies as
priority rather than refining such institutions of the state into ones accountable under just law. If the Indian state's
law enforcement agencies were to be made accountable, for acts of commission and omission, their need to be heavily
armed would not arise.
It is an unconditional guarantee of the rule of law that can drive progress in India. The rule of law negates the space
for authoritarianism, a space where the state and state representatives take precedence over rights of the individual.
That the rule of law is not an exception, is something that can lay the foundation for a strong economy, where all
citizens may benefit from social and economic development, and not just those adept at manipulating the state and
exploiting people.
Without the rule of law, and attempts to debate and establish the same, the electoral process in India is a ritual
without substance. India's metamorphosis from a law and order state to one based on principles of the rule of law is
more eagerly awaited than another ritual exercise.
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation that monitors human rights in Asia,
documents violations and advocates for justice and institutional reform to ensure the protection and promotion of these
rights. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
ENDS