By Neeta Lal
More than six decades after India won its independence, the ruling Congress party establishment has suddenly woken up to the importance of egalitarianism and a democratic ethos across its rank and file. In a surprise move, the party has decreed that its leaders will henceforth eschew all feudal titles, like Raja, Maharaj, Maharani, Rajkumari, Rani, Nawab and Begum, in a move towards greater social inclusiveness and class equity.
Stating that there's no place for such feudal titles in a "democracy like India", a recent party circular directed cadres not to address leaders with honorifics. Royal titles will also be deleted from the party's records.
Insiders admit that the directive to shun royal appendages has come from the party's top echelons because it dovetails with its projection of itself as the "common man's party", a theme which has been central to its campaign to reach out to the people.
So what if the order has come four decades after erstwhile prime minister Indira Gandhi - Congress leader Sonia Gandhi's mother-in-law - abolished privy purses in the late 1960s? According to article 363a of the constitution, the powers and titles of the rulers of the native states have already been discontinued along with the privy purses.
However, despite the official and constitutional disbanding of privy purses, their lingering and pervasive feudal influence continues to dominate Indian polity. As does addressing royalty and even their distant relatives with ego-inflating titles.
Most members of India's erstwhile royal families still prefer to be addressed by their royal titles. Many heads of former royalty have no compunction in continuing to use their titles in their official correspondence either. Recently, an official communication from the office of Minister of State of External Affairs Preneet Kaur referred to the Congress MP from Patiala as "maharani sahiba". Her husband, former chief minister Amarinder Singh, is addressed as a "maharaja" (king). Similarly, Congress general secretary Digvijay Singh is "raja sahib" while former Himachal Pradesh chief minister Virbhadra Singh is "Raja Virbhadra Singh".
Royal lineage and the Congress have proved to be inextricable over the years. India's disgraced erstwhile external affairs minister, who had to relinquish his post because his son was embroiled in a scandal, is still “Kunwar” Natwar Singh. Next generation leaders like Jyotiraditya Scindia - a Stanford University alumnus - may not use a royal title, but he is addressed as “maharaja” by the people of his constituency, Guna, in Madhya Pradesh.
While royals have thrived under Congress patronage, the party has benefited from these scions. Vote banks are easy to capture and it is far easier to orchestrate the official state machinery if a "royal" heads it rather than a commoner.
The Congress' move to abolish titles will thus impact people like Rajkumari Ratna Singh, who emerged victorious from Pratapgarh in Uttar Pradesh, Kunwar RPN Singh, a member of parliament from Kushinagar, Begum Noor Bano who was trounced by actor Jaya Prada in Rampur and Rao Inderjit Singh, the Congress MP from Gurgaon, Haryana.
Political observers feel the Congress' decision is an attempt to cast itself differently from the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Last year, the Rajasthan government issued an advisory to people to shun using royal titles such as "maharani" - a term used prolifically for an erstwhile BJP chief minister from the state of Vasundhara Raje.
Party insiders feel that Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi may have had a big role to play in issuing the directive. The Gandhi scion is aware that in the current Lok Sabha (Lower House) the Congress has the highest number of erstwhile royals on its roster. So to bring about a palpable shift from its feudalistic moorings - ones that permeate Indian society at all levels right from party posts dominated by royal houses to the landed zamindar class - he thought of this savvy move.
This is indeed ironic as despite being the world's largest democracy, India has still not been able to sever the hierarchical ties that lie at the root of its politics and administrative setups. In a bid to rejuvenate the century-old party, Rahul has been trying to usher in changes that will make the Congress more democratic and inclusive.
As a move towards that, the party recently appointed Meira Kumar as the country's first Dalit (untouchable) Lok Sabha woman speaker. Other women-centered measures are also on the anvil as well as some to benefit the backward castes and tribes.
Critics believe the move is nothing but a publicity gimmick and it would have gone down better if the Congress itself wasn't so steeped in a dynastic culture and run like a microcosmic monarchy by the Nehru-Gandhi family.
It could be argued that the Gandhi scions - Rahul, Priyanka and Varun - owe their presence in politics to a lottery of birth. But the masses love the Gandhis, as demonstrated by the recently concluded national elections. Rahul won by a landslide in Amethi in Uttar Pradesh while his cousin Varun Gandhi, who was thrown in jail for his vituperative speeches, too, tasted victory in Pilibhit.
The trans-generational authority of the Nehru Gandhi dynasty is too entrenched to be washed away with one party directive. This is a reality not only in India but across vast swathes of South Asia - Nepal, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Rahul Gandhi knows that he can reap enormous political benefits by speaking the language of change. It's even better if he can infuse that talk with the alchemy of inherited lineage and popular mandate. Yet the party is well aware that "dynasty" is a sword that cuts both ways. Though the Congress may have woken up to the downside of elitism, its royal leaders do have political utility due to their lineage and pedigree. This is precisely the reason why royal appendages survived in the first place, even though privy purses were disbanded long ago.
However, over time, the Congress party has also realized that the feudal factor is proving to be more of a liability than an asset. In other words, in keeping with the party's ongoing perestroika, it feels it is politically prudent to go with democracy over dynasty
No comments:
Post a Comment