RIGHT TO RECALL
This is the most common wrong question we get on proposed TCP-GN. We call it wrong question, because the proposed Gazette does not at all require the citizens to have an internet connection to begin with. Whether the citizen has internet or not, he must visit the Collector’s office in person to submit his complaint or proposal application. And whether he has internet or not, he must visit Talati’s (Lekhpal, Patwari, Village Officer, VO) (lowest official beneath tehsildar, usually one amongst 4-5 villages and one amongst 4-5 wards, who keep land records ) office in person to register YES on a complaint or affidavit. So internet is not at all required for a citizen to use this law. And even if a person has internet, it would make no difference. So the law can be used by all citizen-voters of India. If he / she has internet connection, he / she can read the affidavits with ease. But then so can someone without internet --- he / she only needs to ask someone who has internet connection.
The diagnosis is very wrong. You are blaming victims. Essentially, you say that "victims lack awareness and so problems exist". This is like saying that women get raped and reason is lack of awareness in women, and so women are guilty. I strongly oppose these "blame the victim" logic. The reason why courts etc have failed is rampant corruption in judges and rampant nepotism in judges. We see that Supreme Court Chief justice Khare gave bail to convicted pedophiles and enabled them to escape out of India. And we saw that Justice Ahmedi reduced charges against accused in Bhopal cases. These cases are NOT due to lack of awareness as you say, but only due to rampant bribery in Honorable Supreme Court Justices. And the judges are rampantly taking bribes because we citizens dont have procedures to expel judges and we citizens dont have procedures to execute judges using majority vote. I have proposed 100% Constitutionally valid procedures using which we citizens can expel, imprison or even execute (corrupt) Ministers, IAS, IPS and judges using majority vote . Now question is how can these procedures be enacted? CITIZENS VOICE is easy tool to get these procedures enacted. Thats where power of TCP is. TCP is a tool to get several laws enacted.
It depends on how beneficial the complaint/proposal is to the common people and masses. A complaint which is of lakhs of people like Beating of sleeping people at Ramlila maidan on June 4,2011 if filed with demand of removal of police commissioner will spread like fire and lakhs of people will come to add their names at patwari (Village Officer) office.
Now internet is available to about 4% to 5% of population of India. Say 5 crores of 116 crores commons have internet. Out of these 5 crores, some 4.90 crores are kind of people, who would oppose even giving 1% of PM's servers' diskspace to commons. But some 10 lakh people in these 5 crores do care for commons. So when these 10 lakh well to do people with internet see a pro-common affidavit on web, they will try to propagate it using (i)pamphlets (ii)word of mouth (iii)newspaper ad, and thus the information will reach 5 crore to 10 crore of commons. And if the affidavit has pro-common points, then these 5 crore commons will spread the information to remaining 110 crore commons. So publicity route for pro-common affidavit is : PM's website -> 10 lakh pro-common in from top 5cr of India -> pamphlets, meetings, word of mouth -> 5 crore commons -> word of mouth -> 100 cr commons.
So the process is not restricted to those who have internet. And even if he has internet, no one can read 100s of affidavits that would come in a day. So eventually, the process is run by word of mouth only aided by pamphlets etc.
This law is not unconstitutional as it is not binding on the Lokpal chairperson,etc., to resign if there are crores of persons supporting another lokpal chairperson although no one can stand such public pressure. So this law does not go against any law of the constitution. If you think RTR is unconstitutional, which clause is of RTR violates which article of Constitution in your opinion?
The PM and 2-8 top leaders using anti-defection law can change any law within hours, and NO MP would oppose. eg just before May-2009 election, PM and top leaders forced MPs to pass about 12 legislations in one day !! And PM (Cabinet) has powers to declare emergency and set aside every law and whole of Constitution. It happened once and can happen again. At the end of the day, support to a law-draft comes from -- do people find it useful? . If people find a law immensely useful, then PM will realize that cost of cancelling that law-draft will be open invitation to violent actions from citizens. This is one reason why I want mass-movement to enact RTR. If a law comes via agitation from citizens, it will become more difficult for any PM to cancel it.
In 2004, some 60% people voted. And in 2009, voting % was round about the same. And people dont vote much because they see all winnable candidates alike - equally good or equally bad. That was in one day. If your see the procedures of recall, it is different from the voting procedure. The approvals can be given any day. Voting is done in one day . And considering the fact that 5-10%, people in list are either away from their constituency or dead, actual approvals in RTR procedures can be upto 90 % , that is more than in voting procedures. And in recall, threat of recall alone is sufficient to reduce corruption.
And the percentage of approvals will also depend on whether the affidavit is directly beneficial for the people or not. Example, if someone puts a affidavit saying to make me PM, then maybe no one will support that but if it is written in affidavit that Narendra Modi (or some well known person doing good public work) should be made PM, then the number of approvals will be in crores.
If 50 cr citizens register YES on a draft, and if PM decides not sign that draft and not to resign, that it will be the last PM who takes such decision. The resulting events will ensure that no PM in future will defy citizens. eg in 1650 British King defied Parliament which represented only 4% of citizens. Due to events which followed, no King in UK has dared to defy Parliament since then.
The word "may" is ensure that the clauses are constitutionally valid !! It is to ensure that Constitution-bhagats, who might claim that proposed law is unconstitutional, can be easily asked to shut up. Otherwise, the words "37 cr " carry a force more potent than nukes.
Basically, I have figured out a way of establishing increasing democractic-ness in India without any change in any law and any change in Constitution. And that way is to draft the phrase as "if over 37 cr voters approve then officer may or need not ....". Hell, if 37 cr voters approve, the officer in clause will obey , or else the next officer who will take the place of the deceased one will obey. I wont worry about possibility of officer such as PM not obeying 37 cr citizens. I would let him worry about it. All in all, possibility that MPs will use "may" against wish of 37 cr commons is academic=useless in nature
We have not come across even one hypothetical law-draft which people at large will support and it goes against interest of nation. After all, nation is people. Can you cite a law-draft which you think 52% will register YES and goes against interest of nation? Why would citizens under-pay officers? If so how many employers offer Rs 0 salary to employees? Why not? Because every employer knows than no one can work for below market rates.
If there is any issue or law of the district or state which clashes with the interests of the nation, then the citizens of the nation, can remove that issue or law a majority approval using TCP
Above is a senseless question asked 10s of time. The recall procedures in US have been in since 1830s when literacy was below 5% in voters. In most US states, even as late as 1900s, most US voters had low literacy and awareness. The recall works on trivial principles --- commons tolerate minor irregularities (like police chief taking bribes from some gambling den) and react furiously against major crime (like police chief supporting career criminal). And so despite low literacy in past, recall ensured low corruption police chiefs throughout US history.
US has lot of education etc because corruption has been low in US since 1760s, and corruption has been low mainly because of RTR (and JurySys, a similar concept). And bribery is common in US where RTR doesnt exist. eg US doesnt have RTR over Senators, and so most Senators in US are corrupt.
The citizens will approve some alternate candidate ONLY if and when
1. Existing PM is utterly hopeless.
2. Alternative is far far superior.
And most people will approve someone who has proved himself as district/state level. E.g. Majority of UPites know that Mayawati is corrupt and should be expelled ASAP. If they had replacement procedures, most UPites would approve some IAS, IPS or Mayor who has proved himself at District level.
This language issue is not a flaw of the proposal. It is because India is multi lingual. And PM/CMs etc are always free to put official translation of the affidavits, which they need not do for each affidavit but can do when an affidavit gets a threshold of say 1% . And this is not a law making system, where translation would be of paramount importance. This is opinion gathering system only.
Firstly, these are transparent procedures, in which anyone can see and verify the information anytime and anywere, so that the voice of the people is not suppressed. But if for any reason, anyone wants to make a complaint or support some person in a secret manner, other options are also available. These procedures are only proposed as a alternative transparent way, the secret way will also will be available.
And What is secret these days? You credit card statement is know to Govt. Your bank statement is know to Govt. When you file complaint in police, courts etcall names are disclosed. If nothing happens after all these information being... public or semi-public, what can publishing approvals do?
In some of procedures I have proposed at local level, such replacement of District Police Chief, confidentiality is there. In the replacement procedures I proposed for PM, CM replacement, there is NO confidentiality. I have also drafted a confidential version - the cost is higher but cost on govt and voter is zero, I will later post it here. But does lack of confidentiality do any harm when replacing PM? No, it does not.
1. In the procedure I proposed, replacement will happen if over 24 cr citizens have approved a person. To force 24 cr citizens, an Army of 10,00,00 and police of 15,00,000 will fall short. And policemen and soldiers are not going to agree to do this. So the leader would need about 50,00,000 private criminals to force 24 cr citizens. No one in world can create a gang of even 5000 criminals. When gang size reaches that high, the person has to become pro-citizen, and cant afford to be anti-citizen. In case you have noticed, the criminals try to victimize new-rich and only a handful of commons, the criminals never dare to victimize established rich or a large number of commons --- it simply does not work out. So the fear that someone will manage to force even 1 cr voters, forget 24 cr voters, is too unrealistic.
2. The citizens can file/cancel approvals any day. So the gangleader will have to put gangmen around Talati's (Village Officer) office everyday. Election comes once in 5 years. So you may put 2-5 gang men at booth for a day, But putting gangmen to stop EVERYDAY is not viable. Also, in later versions of the procedure, the person can file his approval at Talati's (Village Officer) office, Tahsil office, Collector's office, Post Offices. No gang leader is strong enough to block citizens from visiting all these places throughout the year.
3. The feudal system you mentions will fall apart when a 2% to 4% wealth tax on land above 5 acre per family members comes and an inheritance tax of 35% over Rs 1 cr comes. Next, when citizens get procedures to expel District Police Chief (which is confidential) and SC-Cj, HC-Cj, District Chief judges etc, these officials will have no options but to beat the cr1p out of criminals. So all these feudal lords will vanish within 3 months after recall procedures arrive.
4. And finally, please note that the procedures I have proposed become law via FIRST proposed law aka Citizens Voice-`Transparent Complaint/Proposal procedure` law. So if people think that open voting is bad, then `Transparent Complaint/Proposal procedure` law will ensure that open voting based procedure to replace PM will not get enacted and instead the procedure which uses confidential voting might come. IOW, my point is, the MTMT law is filter against all "bad" proposals.
The website will be the most protected website, stronger than of any bank. If a hacker can hack this website, he will have to hack crores of accounts and the risk is lot in this case and benefit not much. Such hacker would rather hack some bank website where risk to be caught is less and gains much more.
Please see the procedure. the hacker changes the code or whatever, this website will be watched by crores of people. Say in RTR-PM , the approvals for say ,Swami ji as PM are cancelled, then the supporters of Swami Ramdev will come to know ...by net ( and later by SMS, passbooks, etc) that their approval status is changed. And other people can also see such drastic change in support and the hacker will be most probably be caught. Since this website is visible to crores of people. So, this risk is not worth it for the hacker. He would rather hack a bank website where the number of people watching that site are less and so chances of getting caught is less and gains much more. And say the hacker cancels the approval of Swami ji, even then the supporters of Swami ji can renew their approvals, so all efforts of hacker goes waste. No hacker is that stupid to hack with this safeguard`Any citizen can change/cancel their approvals any day.`
Another thing is that there will be sufficient backup on three-four servers, at the time the complaint is given to collector or YES/NO given at patwari (Village Officer) office. | Only the local server has facility to write the data and every local server will be protected by password. From the local server, data will go to the Central server and other backup servers but they will have only read facility, data cannot be erased and re-writtten.
So, the hacker will be frustrated as there will be not ANY loss of data if there is proper backup, which will be likely the case.
In TCP, complaint is scanned at Collector's office in front of complainer, and within seconds, several copies come in dozens of servers such as servers of Collector's office, CM's office, PM's office, etc.and within minutes, several copies will come on servers of Google, FB etc.
Now one system admin or PM can delete copy on his server. But that will leave an unused serial number or he will have to decrease serial number of several complaints by 1 or he will have to replace deleted complaint by something else. In any case, PM's server will mismatch with servers of collector, CM etc.
So to temper/delete complaint and remain uncaught, one will need to temper too much of data in too many servers. To do so and not get noticed by thousands of people is as difficult as impossible. If one can do this, he will better rob a bank's server.
Approval filing is safer that bank transaction : Not just the person walks to Talati’s (Village Officer) office to file approval, he gets SMS feedback similar to credit card usage and the equipment will take his pix and finger print. Of course, on day-one, these features wont be available, but any Collector can implement them in 3 to 6 months or else citizens should demand his expulsion. With picture, finger print and SMS feedback, the system is safer than bank transaction. If someone can hack this system, he will rather hack a backing system.
NO. Because there is a safeguard that` Any voter can change his/her approval or Yes/No by going to the patwari (Village Officer) office and giving Rs.3`. These procedures will override the media`s influence as they themselves are a alternate media giving verifiable and always visible information about the complaint, candidates for PM etc and their supporters. The people will rely more on the complaint supported by lakhs of people rather than any media reports. And any media or goons used as a influence cost money and their use cannot be continued for long. As soon as their influence finishes, the person even if influenced by them, will be able to change his/her approval and all the effort to influence via media or goons will go to waste.
In RTR-Lokpal (or almost any RTR procedures I have proposed), the citizen can file/change approval by paying Rs 3 fee at Patwari (Village Officer) officer any day. So one would need goons everyday . And to stop 37 crore people or even 5 cr people, one needs lakhs or goons. No one has so many goons, and no one can hire so many goons for days and weeks. Even if PM manages to use entire police force of 15,00,000 , he will not be able to stop so many commons.
To force the PM/CM, we have to do a solution-draft lead, activist guided, Udham Singh centric mass-movement. One example of that is the 1977 anti-emergency mass-movement, in which all the netas were jailed, but still lakhs of activists knew what to do and so the government had to give in.
The leader based movement can be very easily suppressed by the enemy/opponents since in that each activist does not work without taking orders from the leader and the opponents just have to buyout the leader or suppress the leader or jail leader or kill the leader to finish the movement. Example- Anna`s andolan and Swami Ramdev`s BST movement.
Meaning of Udham Singh
Udham Singh or Udham Singhs are those persons who are brave, willing to take risk of life, patriotic, intelligent, work alone without anyone`s orders. To bring about positive change in the country, they do not indulge in time-wasting methods which ultimately result in lot of violence like Anshan, dharna, etc and they adopt most non-violent methods to bring about positive change in the country. They act according to the common opinion of the masses for obtaining the rights of the commons from the authorities and therefore they have support of the crores of commons. Some examples of Udham Singh or Udham Singhs – Bhagat Singh, Udham Singh, Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, revolting Indian Navy Soldiers of 1946, activists of anti-emergency movement, 1977, etc.
Today, the citizens and the country needs quick, short term democratic, solutions to the burning problems of the country besides law-drafts solutions which can be brought via real mass-movement , similar to the mass-movements of Emergency,1975 and Indian Navy Revolt , 1946.
The best short term relief for the burning problems of the country is to do mass campaign of solution-drafts via advertisements / pamphlets. Along with that, we can also have a missed call number where people can register their support.
These are democratic methods for bringing good procedures for the country which will succeed if activists take part. Non-democratic methods such as cheering your leader, slogan shouting, bhashans, closed door discussions, campaigning for neta, anshans, candle light marches etc. will fail to bring any change in the system and country.
These methods actively involve the masses, who are the stake-holders in the country and so these democratic methods are powerful and succeed, while those methods which actively involve only a few persons and not the masses, are weak and undemocratic and fail to bring any positive change in the system.
Even before the procedures are actually printed in gazette notification , via mass-campaign of these procedure-drafts via ads/pamphlets , we can threaten the public servants to behave. If the masses know these procedure-drafts,the public servants will fear that if they do not behave, the masses will demand these procedures and these procedures will come. These procedures enable the commons to punish/replace the corrupt.
In other words, the threat of these procedures coming is also effective and will force the public servants to behave.
We need at least 2-4 lakh activists, who will spend 15-20 hours per month to promote good solution law-drafts and few crores of commons to bring about any positive change in the system and country.
Should a common request PM etc or should a common threaten them within legal limits. Depends on citizen's view on PM/CM/etc. If a common believes that PM etc are honest people, he should request. If citizen believes that PM etc are dishonest people, he should threaten them within legal limits. And if a citizen thinks that PM is dishonest, CM is honest, Mayor is dishonest etc, then should threaten PM, request CM, threaten Mayor etc. How to threaten PM etc within legal limits? It can be
a. I will not vote for your party
b. I will take rally against you
c. I will gherao PMO or your party's offices
d. I will insult you in public within legal limits
e. I will call you 'gali gali mein shor hai' in public rally
f. "I will appeal to Bhagat Singh type committed young men to join me against you"
and so forth.
If you are talking about post-TCP world, then how will crores of affidavits do damage? Rs 20 is charged per page and will cover all the costs including salaries. Scanning one page will take say 100 kb. Say 1 cr affidavit-pages are filed. That takes 1,00,00,000 * 100 kb = 1000,000 MB = 10000 GB = 10 TB = Rs 60,000 of disk space.
And revenue for scanning 1 cr proposals is Rs 20 cr. Add salary costs etc and still TCP draft is not causing any loss to GoI. And how will submitting 10 cr proposals hurt anyone in India? The collector and the patwari (Village Officer) can increase the number of staff required and the whole system is "use and pay" , will be self-sufficient, without any burden on Government or anyone.
It is not binding for the authorities to attend to each and every complaint or even any complaint as this is a opinion-gathering system. But the authorities cannot afford to ignore the complaint which is of lakhs of people.
As per setting "private website for public complaints", it has no value. No one will have faith in what my website says. eg I can post an affidavit saying "Hang corrupt MMS", and in two months say 5 crore citizens register YES. Then would you agree that I didnt fake the numbers? If I am running private-TCP website, you will call me fake-fraud. If you run private-TCP website I will call you fake-fraud. Next, someone will call me Congress agent, and next someone else will call you BJP agent. Govt-website is least unreliable --- please note, least unreliable, same as most reliable. In fact, all private website have near zero reliability on all political matters as owners can fake any numbers he wants. Just look at paid surveys and paid news. Given that numbers have no reliability, no one would bother registering YES/NO.
Now the proposed law is NOTHING but a law that would allow to put complaints of us commons on PM's website in a way that everyone can read. Pls re-read the 3 clauses. The 3rd clause has no LEGAL value and is not a moral binding. And 2nd clause can be removed and the law still has same effect, but collector's staff will be overloaded. eg if 500000 people have a complain, and if there is only clause-1 and no clause-2, then 500000 people will be registering same affidavit, which is loss-loss situation. So clause-2 is only to reduce the burden of system and nothing else. Hence the law is just a forum to register complaints and RTI application on PM's website.
ANY affidavits can be placed, and if the contents are defamatory etc, the postor shall pay dearly and the affidavit will be taken down. And later, one can add laws that would suspend his posting rights for several years. Same as media --- media can print anything, and it is liable for what it prints. But no can in general can stop a mediamen from printing pre-facto(before the fact is committed).
The Collector can delegate the task to his clerk in Tahsils, if and when he decides and facilities are available. The facility must have a decent camera to record the person who is submitting affidavit, scan his finger prints and also scan his IDs. So it can go to village level in near future. But walking to Collector's office or Tahsil office is easier than filing PIL for which one needs to go to HCjs or SCjs and pay hefty bribes
Today, a person in a village or small town, to know any news about a place far away from him , has to rely on newspaper, T.V or other media . But the media is paid, and it has only that news for which it gets money. So, that news is not reliable. But when the Transparent Complaint/Proposal procedure comes and via that Right to recall-PM etc recall procedures come, anyone can put news about a person etc. in their affidavits to the collector and if lakhs and crores of people, who also have to verify themselves by voter id and fingerprint scan at the patwari (Village Officer) office, support that , then that news will be reliable. In other words, these democratic procedures will by themselves become a alternative media and give reliable,verified, news.
In the first round, the information will spread by word of mouth. In the second round, because there will be a alternate, citizens media giving information verifiable by any citizen, today`s paid media will be forced to carry true news or close business.
In the absence of procedures by which we can verify the information, the media and also other people gives false information and we can not prove or disprove things that ` Trusts and people sell their votes`
Common people are stupid, useless, violent, casteist, etc."
Now, until we get procedure like Transparent Complaint / Proposal procedure, there are some rough methods, we can use to verify the information.
Before contemplating on persons we cannot reach, we should find and investigate the facts from the persons around us, whom we can reach easily like YOURSELF, YOUR FRIENDS, YOUR RELATIVES and then people around you in your locality.
And apply the results for you, your friends , your relatives for other citizens of the country. They are no different than your society.
Take some examples-
1) Media says that `People sell their votes` but no one has given any proof for that. So, first have you sold your vote ? Then ask your relatives and friends this question. Then ask the people around you this question , whether they THEMSELVES have sold their vote ? And remembering that vote is secret, can they give any proof, if they claim that they have sold their vote or if any trust claims that it has sold the votes of trustees ?
2) Media often says that common man is stupid, violent, cannot make decisions, etc.
Ask whether this applies to you, next ask whether this applies to your relatives and friends. Lastly investigate whether this applies to people around you.
3) While we respect your work for your organization, we would like to tell a method by which you can verify that your leader/organization is known amongst the masses or not.
Media might tell that there such and such leader/organization has so many crores of supporters, even the supporters may exaggerate.
When transparent complaint/proposal procedure will come, these type of informations with their verifications can be obtained easily because any one can put this information by going to the collector office and other people can support that by going to the village officer office.
And all this information will be verified since the supporters voter id details and finger print scans will be taken.
But , in the absence of Transparent complaint/proposal procedure, what rough method can be employed to know whether a leader or organization is known amongst the masses or not.
Now, 70-80% of the people of the country do not have access to a newspaper or t.v.So, they are not influenced directly by media.
So, I suggest this method to know whether a leader/organization is known amongst masses or not-
Choose five people who do not read newspapers or see TV in your locality and ask them the following questions (these are sample , you can make up your own questions also)-
1) What is Bharat Swabhiman Trust?
2) Who is Baba Ramdev?
3) What is India against Corruption ?
4) Who is Anna Hazare ?
5) Who is Indira Gandhi ?
6) What is Janlokpal bill ?
7) What is black money ?
8) Where is black money ?
9) How can we get back black money?
10) Who is laloo yadav ?
Please ask these and similar questions and as a feedback , please write your area here so that others can cross-verify.
It depends on the nature of the complaint or proposal or candidate. If that is in their direct and immediate interest of the citizens, they will go to the patwari/village officer (or equivalent ) to support or oppose the complaint or proposal or candidate. If someone says, ` Make Mr. X the prime minister` and if Mr. X is not doing good things for the public to be known to many citizens of the country or area, no one will support that proposal, but if Mr. X is well known to quite a few citizens of the country that Mr. X is doing good things for the public, then people will go to support the proposal, since they will think all they have to lose is Rs. 3 but they may gain more by getting a good prime minister.
Another example is the proposal of MRCM, which will ensure that Rs. 300-400 every month goes directly to the accounts of every citizen. Now, 50 crores voters earn less than Rs. 20 per day. So, how many of them will say, I do not want this 100% ethical money of Rs. 300-400 per month ? According to me, not even 5% will say so.
As far as the method for registering /supporting a complaint/proposal/candidate is concerned, the people will choose that method which has the maximum effect ,in which lakhs/crores can see their application or support or opposition, and add their YES/NO to that and any citizens can verify that also and that method has the least possible effort and money spent for that amount of effect. As far as we know, these methods outweigh all other methods, especially if people have to register more than one application, support or oppose more than once in 2-3 years.
Caste and religion etc. bias is exagerated by the politicians via the media. If you investigate about it among your friends and relatives, you will find it is not that much. And Caste, religion and other biases, are more when the number of people participating are less. In these procedures, lakhs and crores of people can participate, so the caste, religion biases , even if there will cancel out and so these procedures actually reduce any type of bias.
How biases- caste, favoritism, nepotism, religion etc. decrease with democratic procedures
Please note that bias is natural in humans but our systems can be made unbiased.
A. The factors which determine whether bias comes into play or not are:
1. Comparative Goodness or badness of the available choices:
Although 95% people may say they are not biased, but if the choices are equally bad or good, bias does come into play.
Say you have to eat outside and all the hotels are equally bad and one of them is that of your relative, you will prefer the hotel of your relative, thinking that maybe the relative will give special treatment and give good food. But if a hotel of a non-relative is much better than the rest and of the hotel of the relative , naturally people will prefer that .
The same situation can be applied to voting, selection of CM, PM by the MPs/MLAs, selection of employees, selection of judges, etc.
2. Bias increases with the increase in discretionary power of the electing or selecting person and opportunity to form nexuses:
If the selecting/electing person has more discretionary powers and opportunity to form nexuses , they are more likely to display their bias.
A chief minister will be able to display more bias by selecting his/her favorites, caste, relatives compared to a common citizen who does not have much discretionary power.
Supreme Court Judge will ask minister to recommend his/her relative for post of public prosecutor while minister will ask the SC judge to favor his/her relatives in cases which are in courts of the SC judge or his/her friends.
Always FIRST start with the present systems. If you see present system, you will see that the public servants have their interests. And people choose those servants whose interests is not against the interests of the masses.
B. In oligarchic procedures, the masses cannot counter the biases of the top few and the top few gang up and loot the masses.
This was the case of the present oligarchic, undemocratic procedures, which unfortunately we have today.
Now , in democratic procedures, also there is the same bias and interests , BUT the BIASES CANCEL OUT AND THE INTERESTS WHICH ARE COMMON ARE HIGHLIGHTED and implemented. Those interests which are not against the interests of the masses.
If the public authority like CM, PM is biased favoring his/her relatives, friends, the masses who suffer will gang up against that biased person and replace that person with a unbiased person. So, in democratic procedures, the top few will not be able to loot the masses.
On a small scale, you can understand democracy of a family. The family members tell their interests and the head takes the decision according to the interests of the family members majority. Similar is a democratic system in the country.
C. Issue of National Interest:
In reality, there is NO case where something will benefit big chunk of population and harm national interest .
If someone claims so, he should refer to a particular draft like TCP, RTR-DEO, RTR-PM, etc and give the scenario how these democratic drafts will go end up hurting national interest. He will give scenarios, and one by one you need to rule them out as logistically infeasible. That way, he or at least audience, can be convinced that these democratic procedures are good.
And please note that the counts of the opinions of the common citizens will be not binding on the authorities, so the public authorities can in extraordinary circumstances take decisions which are contrary to the opinions of the masses but in interest of the country.
This happens even today, but today, there is no way the public authorities can know about the opinions of the citizens and most likely the decisions will be deliberately or undeliberately, be anti-commons, against the masses.
So, proposed democratic procedures reduce biases while oligarchic procedures of today exaggerate the biases.
D. What we activists should do:
Please see some proposed democratic procedures like Transparent Complaint Procedure (TCP), Right to Recall-PM, Right to recall-CM, Right to Recall-Judges, Jury system, etc in chapters 1,6,7,21 of www.righttorecall.info/301.pdf
Please promote and demand these procedures by putting these procedures in your wall notes if you really want to reduce bias in our systems.
Please comment giving the full situation, citing the alternatives or choices to a individual while electing/selecting.
Now, if a hindu voter votes for a hindu candidate or a hindu person selects a hindu candidate, it is wrong to call him/her biased that he/she did not vote for/select the muslim candidate. We have to see whether the muslim candidate was much better and unbiased compared to the hindu candidate whom the voter preferred or the muslim candidate was equally bad or equally good compared to the hindu candidate.
E. Special case of First Past the Pole system, that is one person can give vote to one person:
In first past the pole system existing in our country, a person can give vote to a single candidate and the candidate who wins by even one vote is declared the winner.
Here the voter since he/she has a single vote, votes against the party he hates most.
So, if a voter hates Congress he will vote against the Congress for a party which is perceived to most likely win against Congress like BJP, SP etc. And if a voter hates BJP, he will vote against the BJP for a arty which is perceived to most likely win against BJP .
This results in the independents etc , parties who are new and not perceived to win , not getting enough votes. This system suppresses the new comers.
This problem is 800 years old and the solution is also 800 years old , that is preferential voting where each voter can give votes for one to five candidates in order of preference . This way the person can give vote to the person he likes most and also to the person who is perceived to win against the person / party he hates most. Thus, in this system , the independents and the new comers have increased probability of winning.
Please see chapter 40 , www.righttorecall.info/301.pdf for details of preferential voting
F. Issue of reservation to minorities:
Please note that the benefits of reservation go to only top 1% of the the caste, religion getting the benefits of reservation. Since the jobs or seats are limited, the poorest of those minorities , who do not have the needed connections or money , do not get the benefit of reservation.
Then why do politicians give reservation promises?
Because they want to form nexuses with the elite of those minorities. The politicians will ensure that the elite of the minorities get the reservation benefits and in turn these elite who have influence amongst media will give the politicians favorable media coverage or the politicians might get cash or other favors. This is the case in most of the cases of said muslim vote-bank.
Also, the elite who get reservation benefits can campaign for the favorable image amongst the non-elite of that caste/class/area . In our country, the non-elite very much depend upon the elite for every day needs. Once TCP, RTR over CM, PM, MPs, MLAs , judges , officials , Jury system etc come , the non-elite will no longer be depending on the elite.
If someone is really interested in reducing reservation and that too by the approval of the poor SC/ST etc. , please see chapter 36 of www.righttorecall.info/301.pdf
No, TCP has not been implemented anywhere. In developed countries, the situation of commons was not so bad that it was needed there since there were other democratic procedures like Jury System, Right to recall, effective wealth tax, inheritance tax, etc. You can write to the CM to put this procedure in gazette so as to implement at city/district level. If you do that, we will support that.