The Direct Democracy Experiment
In the ongoing US elections, all eyes are on the tightly contested Presidential race. But equally fascinating and insightful are the several ballot measures that were put to vote across states. From abortion rights to minimum wage, from a continued ban on affirmative action⁵ to gig economy (employment model of Uber and rider share apps) — the issues that were put to vote covered a diverse gamut of issues and the responses to these initiatives were equally diverse. This model of governance with pockets of participatory democracy embedded within representative democracy is becoming increasingly common in the world. I believe that this direct democracy experiment is one that urban India should also embrace — albeit cautiously.
India is a representative democracy where we vote for candidates and not issues. While voters hope that the elected representatives will amplify their collective interests, the representatives’ responsibility is to frame laws for national interest & their intuition is to prioritize their self-preservation. In this tussle, what is often lost is the voice of the citizens. Direct democracy is an attempt to even out the scales and give citizens a greater role in framing of laws that they are governed by.
Among countries with differing direct democracy models, an oft-cited example is Switzerland. The parliament in Switzerland passes laws and regulations. Citizens however, also have the right to call federal referendums. The 170 year history of referendums in Switzerland, is checkered with initiatives that span the entire ideological spectrum. While the Swiss accepted an initiative prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation, they also imposed a ban on construction of minarets amid fears of increasing ‘Islamization’¹. In more recent times, Brexit has been the favorite example cited by detractors of direct democracy. Four years on, UK is still coming to terms with the mechanism of bringing to fruition the outcome of the Brexit referendum. Closer home, several of India’s South-Asian neighbors have used referendums as a tool to determine the system of governance and constitutional amendments. India has in fact been a beneficiary of the controversial Sikkim referendum which voted in favor of banning monarchy and integrating Sikkim with the rest of India.
However, India itself has been reluctant to delve into the direct democracy experiment. While the 73rd constitutional amendment⁶, ushered in participatory democracy in rural areas with the constitution of Gram Sabhas (made of every individual in the electorate), the 74th amendment⁷ did not bestow the same privileges to Urban Local Bodies(ULBs). Gram Sabhas are constitutionally man-dated talk-based, discursive public meetings that have brought direct democracy to Indian villages². Gram Sabhas also have oversight over the functioning of Panchayats.
The 74th amendment left it to the states to decide upon a system of urban governance, allowing for vast differences in how ULBs are constituted, their powers and their functions across states. Ward committees which were proposed to allow citizen participation remained effective only on paper. Today, there are very little powers vested in the hands of the urban electorate besides electing a Mayor (directly or indirectly). This has led to high voter apathy³ and reduced voter turn out for urban civic body elections. There have been studies that have proposed meaty fiscal and procedural reforms⁸ to improve urban governance in Indian cities.
Besides the reforms already proposed, India’s urban centers are also the best petri dishes to run a direct democracy experiment. For a country as diverse as India, reaching consensus at a national or even state level is an insurmountable task. In the relatively smaller confines of a city though, debate and deliberation can be used more effectively as tools for consensus building and increasing civic participation. Even in terms of political feasibility, while the idea of sharing legislative powers with the citizens is difficult to envisage at a national or state level, urban local governments are the proverbial small fishes in a big pond. With high penetration of smartphones, Indian cities are also best placed to leverage technology to mobilize citizens.
Direct democracy is by no means a silver bullet for all issues faced by urban India. It is in fact a double-edged sword which could easily take a turn towards majoritarianism(refer the Swiss ban on minarets cited above). But as we move towards a world where electronic voting may soon become a reality, citizens must be empowered to assume a bigger role in decision-making. In a country that has borne witness to one-sided political battles in the past and, is slated to continue to see the same at a national level, citizens should be armed to provide an active system of checks and balances that even the opposition often fails to provide. The starting point for this step is encouraging increased participatory democracy in ULBs. No experiment is guaranteed to give anticipated results. But leaving status-quo unchanged and urban voters apathetic to the existing process in an increasingly urbanizing⁴ country could prove to be the bigger risk.
¹ “Switzerland’s controversial minaret ban, ten years on — SWI ….” 29 Nov. 2019, https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/political-history_the-controversial-minaret-ban--ten-years-on/45399822 . Accessed 6 Nov. 2020.
² “Oral Democracy — Cambridge University Press.” https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/oral-democracy/1389E93F8F69AA1AB07B434124CE7582 . Accessed 6 Nov. 2020.
³ “Why people do not vote in municipal corporation elections.” http://gipe.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/WHY-PEOPLE-DO-NOT-VOTE-IN-MUNICIPAL-CORPORATION-ELECTIONS-A-VOTER-BASED-SURVEY-IN-MUMBAI-MUNICIPAL-CORPORATION.pdf . Accessed 6 Nov. 2020.
⁴ “How much of India is actually urban? — Mint.” 16 Sep. 2017, https://www.livemint.com/Politics/4UjtdRPRikhpo8vAE0V4hK/How-much-of-India-is-actually-urban.html. Accessed 6 Nov. 2020.
⁵ “Why California Rejected Racial Preferences, Again” 10 Nov. 2020 https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/why-california-rejected-affirmative-action-again/617049/
⁶“THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-THIRD AMENDMENT) ACT, 1992” https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/upload_document/73amend.pdf
⁷“THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-FOURTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 1992"
https://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/upload_document/74amend.pdf
⁸ “URBAN ISSUES, REFORMS AND WAY FORWARD IN INDIA”
https://dea.gov.in/sites/default/files/Urbanissues_reforms.pdf
