All the major political parties in Andhra Pradesh, except the Congress, have come out in favour of the formation of a separate Telangana state. Even within the Congress Party, most leaders including legislators, ministers in the state as well as at the Centre belonging to Telangana are in its favour.
The first States Reorganisation Commission (SRC), which recommended in 1956 the formation of a separate Hyderabad state consisting of Telangana, referred to consensus as the one reached among the Telangana people themselves. It is clear from its recommendation that after five years Telangana could be merged with Andhra only if two-thirds of the Telangana legislators opted for it. But consensus has now come to mean among everybody at the national and state level, except the people of Telangana!
The Committee headed by Pranab Mukherjee is supposed to be working towards building the consensus. But the Congress party’s own position on Telangana is not made clear. If it is ‘No,’ then this exercise in unnecessary; if ‘Yes,’ it would make the exercise positive and meaningful. Even if the Second SRC were to be constituted, as per the Congress Election Manifesto of 2004, the party could not have remained non-committal on the issue, as every party would have made its position clear to the SRC.
If the Congress supported statehood for Telangana, it would have introduced a Bill in Lok Sabha. If the Bill could not have been introduced due to a lack of consensus in the UPA, then the people would have understood the constraints. But the Congress party’s own position was never made clear in these five years.
The real explanation for the Congress not taking a stand is the ‘veto power’ being exercised by a few leaders in power in the state ever since the formation of Andhra Pradesh. This demonstrates how a few individuals can manipulate the levers of power in a large and heterogeneous state by dint of the resources and power at their command. Though they have been saying that they will abide by the decision of their high command on Telangana, one wonders whether the high command is in Delhi or Hyderabad!
Telangana is a national issue, not just a regional one. It actually reflects the ongoing social change in the country for the empowerment of people through decentralised governance, by broadening and deepening our democratic system. Such empowerment and governance would enable articulation of the real problems of the people. This would result in socially inclusive Telangana. Inclusiveness could not be achieved so far in a bigger state because the entrenched interests were perpetuated and the voice of the disadvant aged sections remained fragmented.
Tribals are the most disadvantaged section socially and economically with negligible political voice. They live in remote areas and are subjected to land alienation on a large scale. So far, hardly any initiative has been taken in Andhra Pradesh to restore their land despite strong recommendations made by a high level Committee constituted by the present government. There, the administration is alienated from the people and the areas became a breeding ground for extremist activities. Yet, this has been treated as a law and order problem and not as the socio-economic issue that it is.
Scheduled Tribes population constitutes around 9% in Telangana as against 5% in the rest of the state. Thus, as much as 60% of the ST population of AP is concentrated in Telangana.
Similarly, the population of Muslims is as high as 12.5% in Telangana when compared to 6.9% in the rest of AP. As many as 61% of Muslims of AP live in Telangana, of whom 60% are spread over in different districts other than Hyderabad. Socially and economically disadvantaged sections including SCs, STs and BCs constitute not less than 85% of the population in Telangana. They would all be better able to articulate their problems and politically assert themselves. A separate Telangana can thus strengthen the forces of social inclusion.
The Eleventh Plan document, lately approved by the National Development Council, gives the following telling figures showing that the recently created smaller states like Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Uttaranchal achieved growth rates in Gross State Domestic Product far exceeding the targets set for the 10th Plan period whereas the performance of their parent states, viz., Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh was distinctly lower, falling considerably short of the targets. (See box)
This experience suggests that the growth potential of these backward areas remained suppressed for long, before their constitution into new states. Better governance may have also contributed to attracting outside investment as well as to better planning and utilisation of resources.
Governance at the grass roots can be improved by strengthening the Panchayati Raj institutions which have been deprived of their functions, finances and functionaries. It is indeed ironical that the Congress, which owes allegiance to Rajiv Gandhi, who visualised the 73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution, has not taken any initiative to revitalise these institutions. On the contrary, attempts have been made to undermine these institutions by floating several top-down schemes and parallel implementation structures even naming some schemes after Rajiv Gandhi! In a separate Telangana state, the empowerment of these local elected institutions would be high on the agenda because of the greater pressures these elected representatives can bring to bear on the new establishment.
No comments:
Post a Comment