Tom Plate / Syndicated columnist
India's democracy test

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive

LOS ANGELES — True democracies have deeply embedded institutions that work properly even (and especially) in crisis, and leaders and voters who make sure that these institutions are able to do their work.

The Earth's most populated democracy, India, may be on the verge of showing a world that's also roiled by ethnic and religious tensions exactly how this is done. This comparatively young democracy (birth: 1947) faces a defining moment in its political evolution. In the province of Gujarat last year, Hindu-Muslim rioting led to many deaths. Now the challenge for India's leaders and institutions is to achieve justice for the victims within Indian law. This will be no easy task.

While India is a secular democracy where tolerance is commonplace, violent religious clashes are not uncommon. This important nation will require political and institutional leadership of a very high order to meet the Gujarat challenge.

The critical issue is twofold.

One is whether the norms of secularism will be observed in deed as well as in theory. India's prime minister, for his part, says he's not in doubt.

"Indian ethos regards secularism as equal respect for all religions," Atal Bihari Vajpayee said recently during an observance of Universal Brotherhood Day at his residence in New Delhi. "But even this is being criticized these days. However, those opposed to such a concept of secularism would not succeed."

Settling the Gujarat case will test Indian democracy as never before. Critics and cynics only rolled their eyes when the prime minister, hailing from the nationalist Hindu party, told editors of The Financial Times recently that "there is no doubt that those perpetrating such violence should be punished. ... Justice will not only be seen to be done, it will be done."

Judging from its performance lately, India's Supreme Court would appear to be on message. Last week, it opened the door to a dramatic change of venue for a dozen alleged violence perpetrators. The court bluntly worried that fair trials could not possibly be held in the provincial state of Gujarat, where passions are inflamed and witnesses for the prosecution of Hindus charged with committing violence on Muslims are said to be intimidated from testifying truthfully.

This is the same Supreme Court that recently ordered the release, on constitutional grounds, of a half-dozen prominent Indian journalists who had been jailed for anti-state activities. So at the moment, India's highest court would appear to be working as independently and as well as anyone else's.

Its 26 judges, though they are political appointees (as in many countries), have the reputation for high competence and a level of education exceeding the country's governing elite, which has been known to try to influence court decisions. And the justices have had to struggle with Parliament over the decades for independence.

But while the institution is not perfect (and what supreme court is?), it has proven a vital check on state coercion. Ten years ago, for instance, it issued rulings to compensate victims of violence while in police custody and laid down clear guidelines for the treatment and interrogation of suspects while under arrest. And now it has fired a shot across the bow of authorities in Gujarat.

The achievement of a healthy measure of judicial autonomy is a powerful and essential sinew in the muscle of a democracy. To the extent that it underscores the rule of law, it can suffuse a society with a self-confident sense of civilization and respect for the rights of others.

The rule of law and an independent judiciary can also be essential to cultivate a safe and secure climate in which to conduct business and develop the economy. Earlier this week, the Geneva-based World Economic Forum held an India Economic Summit. Participants from the corporate as well as political world arrived from all over.

The timing was apt. For the India that hosted this glitzy globalization crowd would appear to be advancing along a deeply defined democratic path. The continuing contributions of its highest court are impressive. The statements by its prime minister have been helpful. If the trend continues, the payoff both politically and economically will be substantial.

"Inequality, poverty, exclusion, religious fanaticism, racism, xenophobia and lack of dialogue are all impediments to development which ought to be overcome if we are to work toward the establishment of a more global democratic culture," wrote former U.N. Secretary-General Boutrous Boutrous-Ghali recently in The Hindu, a major newspaper.

In India, many are trying to light the light to show the way in this troubled time.

Tom Plate is a UCLA professor and founder of the Asia Pacific Media Network (www.asiamedia.ucla.edu). His column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times.

Copyright 2003, Tom Plate