Right to Recall in India: Meaning and Implications

(Hello folks! Here is the long awaited article on Right to recall. I hope I will be forgiven for such inexplicable delay! For those who are new, let me tell you that there is another article written by me which deals with pros and cons of Right to Reject. You would be able to appreciate the conclusion of this article if you could please read the post on Right to Reject by following this link. Its not compulsory to read at all..This post will make sense either way. Dont forget to comment! Nothing stimulates the mind better than a discussion. )

Meaning of Right to Recall

The right or procedure by which a public official, commonly a legislative or executive official, may be removed from office, before the end of his term of office, by a vote of the people to be taken on the filing of a petition signed by a required number or percentage of qualified voters. (Taken from Brainyquote.com)

In simple terms, we will be granted a right to recall an under-performing/non performing representative before his 5 year term ends. This could be done if voters in the area are of the opinion that the person must be recalled and elections must take place again with new candidates. Right to Recall has not been introduced in India yet. The demand for it caught momentum when Anna Hazare called for it. There are many people who feel that introduction of this right would curb corruption.

The reasons why Right to Recall should be introduced:

1. Right to recall would make India a democracy in the true sense. No need to tolerate a corrupt or incompetent person for a full 5 year term. 2. Good performance of the chosen representative would be ensured by Right to Recall because they can be removed from position due to non-performance. 3. Promises made during elections would be fulfilled by the Representative due the apprehension that he may be kicked out if he does not keep promises.

Reasons why Right to Recall should not be introduced:

1. Undue Fear: The representative would be in constant pressure to work the way people want him. He is supposed to be a sensible person with a strong decision making capacity keeping in view the interest of all the members of the society. Constant fear will deter him from taking tough (but good) decisions (e.g. permission to demolish/displace a temple or a Mosque for expansion of road to facilitate the free movement of traffic.) 2. No certainty: There is uncertainty of the time period he would be serving the public. This uncertainty would make it hard to make plans/policies which yield substantial results in long term. To fulfill public expectations, he will be forced to implement plans and decisions yielding instant results! 3. Increased Politics: Political rivals would make issue out of smallest of the mistake of the representative and demand a recall election! This gives rise to unnecessary political games!! 4. Internal Politics:Not only party rivals but also party members intending to grab the seat would keep plotting to throw the present candidate out of the game. 5. Pleasing People: Representatives would keep spending lots of money just to please people (E.g. Making road where it was already there!) 6. Scope for terrify and rule: Those representatives who exercise power in smaller constituencies would use force to threaten people who dare to demand reelection under right to recall. (We are all aware that politicians in villages and small districts reign with help of Goondas) 7. Instability: There will be a state constant political turmoil and politicians would be busy saving seat instead of working for development 8. Corruption: Political opponents might bribe a group of people and prompt them to demand the elections under Right to recall against present candidate. Other way round, the present candidate would bribe the people demanding recall to shut them up! (Daaru and Paisa works wonders!) 9. More govt. expenditure: Recall election would imply more expenditure of Tax payers money to organize re-elections time and again.

Conclusion
We have analyzed the pros and cons of both, the Right to Reject and the Right to Recall. What do you think now? Should both of them be given to the people or any one of them would suffice? Here is what I feel- Granting of Right to Reject is a balanced option. It is evident that it has more arguments in its favour. It is safer and would not lead to constant political upheaval. Parties would be forced to give ticket to a candidate with clean and good past record. Good representatives can actually be expected to keep up their performance for next five years.

Right To Recall; Need Of Democracy

Introduction and Meaning:According to General Clause Act, 1897, power to make the appointment shall also have power to suspend or dismiss any person appointed.[1] Dictionary meaning of the Recall is the right or procedure by which a public official may be removed from a position by a vote of the people prior to the end of the term of office. Recall is the retiring of an elected officer by a vote of the electorate. Some state constitutions prescribe the procedure that must be followed in a recallfor example, requiring the filing of a petition containing the signatures of a specific number of qualified voters.The right or procedure by which a public official, commonly a legislative or executive official, may be removed from office, before the end of his term of office, by a vote of the people to be taken on the filing of a petition signed by a required number or percentage of qualified voters.[2] Specifically and in simple terminology it is a kind of mechanism designed to enable voter not satisfied with an elected representative to remove him/her before completion of fixed period of office initiated when sufficient voters sign a petition. Through an electoral procedure, this power of removal, constitutionally, is either granted to or reserved by the people, depending on the theory of government and sovereignty in the country in question. Brief History:Recall has a history dating back to the ancient Athenian democracy[3] and is a feature of several contemporary constitutions.The concept of recall originated in Switzerland but became operative in several American States. The recall device began in the United States in a municipality in Los Angeles in 1903. Michigan and Oregon, in 1908, were the first the States to adopt recall procedures for state officials Status In India:In India it was the late Jayaprakash Narayan who had first given a call for the right to recall the elected representatives on November 4, 1974 during his Sampoorna Kranti (Total Revolution) movement against the Congress government headed by Indira Gandhi at the Centre[4] followed by the Janata Government in 1977 and again during the National Front Government in 1989. The right to recall the elected representative has remained notional. The process of formulation any legislation on the subject has been derailed by the political parties. It is well established fact that political leaders are reluctant to enact any legislation which depicts that they are hesitant to maturing into participatory democracy. In State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. v. Shri Ram Singh Honble Supreme Court observed that, Corruption in a civilized society is like cancer, which if not detected in time is sure to malignise the polity of the country leading to disastrous consequences. It is termed as a plague which is not only contagious but if not controlled spreads like a fire in a jungle. Its virus is compared with HIV leading to AIDS, being incurable. It has also been termed as royal thievery. The socio-political system exposed to such a dreaded communicable disease is likely to crumble under its own weight. Corruption is

opposed to democracy and social order, being not only anti-people, but also aimed and targeted at them. It affects the economy and destroys the cultural heritage. Unless nipped in the bud at the earliest, it is likely to cause turbulence shaking of the socioeconomic political system in an otherwise healthy, wealthy, effective and vibrating society[5] There are several examples, Mr. Madhu Koda, the former Chief Minister of Jharkhand, is alleged to have looted Rs 4,000 crore[6] from the state followed by The Reddy brothers, YSRs family[7], which are just the latest additions. It has been observed that all of them get away with the loot, and continue to be in positions of influence. There is not a single politician who has been put behind bars for corruption. It is in the interest of the nation to remove those incompetent, inefficient and dishonest legislators, who once elected by hook or by crook, continue to bleed the state exchequer for the fixed term. Current conditions in India where even the peasantry is articulating need for new mechanisms for empowerment demands to have laws enshrining the right to recall must be viewed as important ingredients of the fight for renewal of the polity. Steps towards Right to Recall:The Nitish Kumar Government has decided to empower the voters of the urban civic body polls to call back their elected representatives if they are not satisfied with their performance. The state cabinet has agreed to the right to recall proposal in this regard by giving its nod to the amendment to the Bihar Municipal Act. It will enable the government to remove the elected representatives of the municipal corporations Nagar Parishad and Nagar Panchayat -if two-thirds of the voters of their constituencies submit a signed petition to the urban development department against them. The department will look into the merit of the petition and take steps for the ouster of the councillors if it is convinced that they have lost the confidence of twothirds of the voters. Earlier, the Act had a provision for the removal of a councillor only if two-thirds of fellow councillors filed a written petition against him. But now, the government has vested the power directly with the voters. There is already a provision under the Panchayati Raj system in the state for the recall of elected mukhiyas (village headmen). It will now be applicable to the elected representatives of the urban civic bodies as well.[8] Merits:

Recall is a process which enables voters dissatisfied with an elected official to replace him before the expiry of his term of office, which will make them more accountable to the people. The recall device has also the potential to encourage the citizens to keep themselves side by side of contemporary public issues in order to monitor the conduct of their elected representatives.

It provides a way for citizens to retain control over elected officials who are not representing the best interests of their constituents, or who are unresponsive or incompetent. This mechanism holds that an elected representative is an agent, a servant and not a master in a democratic state.

Demerits:

How will the government determine whether the petition submitted to it for the recall of the elected representatives carry the signatures of the genuine voters? How will it be ensured that the signatures of such a large number of people have not been forged? It can lead to an excess of democracy, where the threat of a recall election lessens the independence of elected officials. It undermines the principle of electing good officials and giving them a chance to govern until the next election, and that it can lead to abuses by well-financed special interest groups. It will only compound an already problem-ridden system. Country like India is not in a position to hold election so frequently.

Conclusion:Concluding in the words of The Former Lok Sabha Speaker Mr.Somnath Chatterjee at Thiruvanthapuram where he recommended the introduction of right to call of elected representatives in India. He said It is time for us to look for devices such as recall to ensure accountability of the members of democratic institutions at all levels, before the common man gets totally disillusioned with the prevailing system. The performance and the functioning of the parliament as well as its members would improve if people who elected their representatives to voice their grievances watched the parliamentary proceedings regularly. But, it is not such an easy thing to be resolved in our parliamentary democracy as all the political parties have to arrive at a consensus, which may be a difficult task.[9] India, the largest democracy isnt the most effective one. The irony and the clumsiness of the electoral process in India is that it has not been able to keep out criminal, antisocial and undesirable elements from participating in and even dominating the political scene and polluting the electoral and parliamentary processes. It can be corrected only by putting voters in control and Right to recall, is an excellent accountability tool. At present, provision for recall is necessary in democracy because elected representative at all levels give the impression that they have protection from all laws of the country and majority of them acts only for profit earning not for the welfare of the state.