by Arun Srivastava
From funding the elections to choosing the prime ministerial candidate, the corporate sector has acquired enormous political power and has, in the process, emerged as the sole determinant factor of the destiny of India. Never before in the 66 years of independent India had any prime ministerial candidate to walk on the ramps of the corporate houses as recently Narendra Modi and Rahul Gandhi had to do at the FICCI and CII meets on the plea of elucidating their views and opinions on the future of India and their immediate priorities.
For the urban Indian middle class, this bore typical similarity to the US presidential debate. They were also delighted that finally the people had the opportunity to listen to their leaders' views and opinions. But in reality the corporate sector was weighing the two leaders: who will suit their needs and can do justice to them? In fact this is the gift of reforms and liberalisation wherein the market forces decide the course of life. In a globalised society everything is a commodity and the office of the Prime Minister is not an exception as the person has to act in conformity with the needs of the corporate sector and the reforms.
Little doubt the involvement of the corporate sector in the process of choosing the prime ministerial candidate would trivialise the entire exercise for the election of the Prime Minister. Unlike in the US presidential election, in India the majority party in the Lok Sabha chooses its leader who eventually becomes the Prime Minister. This might appear to be a simplistic approach to the election process. But this is the fact. It is a different matter that the political parties even before the Lok Sabha elections announce the names of their prime ministerial candidates and the party concerned goes to polls under him. The Congress made a departure in 2004; it went to polls and after the elections it chose Dr Manmohan Singh as the Prime Minister.
True enough, the corporate sector, instead of allowing the parties to field their candidates, has been trying to project a candidate of its own choice, irrespective of the party he belongs to, the Congress or BJP. It is a well-known fact that members of the corporate sector, precisely the private businessmen, have their own priorities, often antagonistic in relation to each other. Obviously anybody ascending the throne of the Prime Minister will have to appease divergent sections of the corporate sector and fulfill their expectations.
From the beginning the private sector had its own expectations and often tried to create pulls and pressures on the government to achieve its motto, but in the era of reforms it has become far more aggressive. They have been making the government to dance to the tunes of Sensex. The changes in the policies and programmes, post-Jaipur chintan shivir of the Congress, clearly manifest the mood of the political establishment. The party cannot divorce itself from the rural poor openly but the manner in which it shifted its focus from them to the urban middle class underlines the importance of the political and economic needs of the corporate sector.
The corporate sector never resorts to fair practices while providing elections funds to the political parties. They expect that investments must fetch the desired results. It is also a fact that almost all the industrial houses discriminate between political parties. They always prefer to pay more to the party in power or the one likely to come to power. This time already a scenario is being created wherein the UPA is shown as the loser and the BJP the gainer. Naturally the stakes of the corporate sector will be too high. Earlier the liquor industry or small traders used to finance the political parties and play important roles in the selection of candidates. But during the last fifteen years, precisely in the phase of reforms, the businessmen from real estates or construction have also been putting their money in the election game. They have been quite ruthless in their approach and atti-tude. They would not like their money to go waste. This time the private sector or corporate sector will prefer to put their bets on Modi.
But by doing so they would be committing a blunder. They can assess the mood of the urban middle class, their consumers, but they cannot comprehend the inclinations and mood of the rural people, who constitute the largest vote-bank. Basically this uncertainty has made the UPA Government undertake some of the economic programmes for the rural poor. Notwithstanding their poor implementation at the ground zero level, the government has been actively pursuing its policies and programmes only in the hope that these will help the Congress.
The Indian Corporate Inc has also not been too averse or opposed to Hindu fundamen-talism. This is yet another reason for their preference for Modi. It is a well-known fact that he is yet to come out clean in the Gujrat pogrom of 2002. It cannot be ruled out that his becoming the Prime Minister may embolden the fundamen-talists; it would certainly embolden Right-wing militancy. His ascendance will turn these organi-sations more aggressive as they escaped any action or punishment in Gujarat owing to their proximity to him. Besides Hindu fundamentalists, his election would also embolden the Islamic fundamentalists. Little doubt elements on both sides would seek to capitalise and there is a serious worry about the potential tit-for-tat escalation of violence in the event of Modi becoming the PM.
The Gujarat Chief Minister has been talking of the Gujarat Model of Governance. But this is not based on the basic parameters of develop-ment; its motto is injecting money into the projects instead of moulding and giving shape to the raw entrepreneurs. This cannot be replicated at the all-India level. For the corporate sector this may be the major attraction, but it is fraught with the extreme danger of eliminating the rural sector. The corporate sector may also get the right ambience to penetrate into the rural sector.
For bringing transparency in the corporate financing of political parties, the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC), S.Y. Quraishi, in the recent past called for funding being made subject to audit and disclosure and cautioned against allowing the corporate sector to play “a direct role in the conduct of elections”. Large sums of money spent in elections have had tragic effects on democracy including deterring citizens from political participation. This nature of elections will eventually lead to the poor losing confidence in the efficacy of their contribution to the democratic process.
A senior journalist, the author worked in several newspapers including The Times of India and The Indian Express. For 10 years he functioned as the Executive Editor of Goa's Navhind Times. He can be contacted at sriv52@gmail.com