The Hindu Business Line : <I>Have they done enough? </I>

The Constitution provides for the appointment by the Government of 12 eminent persons in public life as members of the Rajya Sabha for six years. The idea is to induct those who have distinguished themselves by their contribution to literature, education, science, arts and the nation's progress in various walks of life The Government too is supposed to benefit from their dispassionate advice based on their intellectual and professional attainments.

From the time Parliament came into being at the time of Independence, there have been 127 such luminaries nominated to the Rajya Sabha. Among them were persons such as Zakir Hussein, Rukmini Arundale, J.C .Kumarappa, R.K. Narayan, K.M. Panikkar, Malcolm Adiseshiah, Khushwant Singh, M.C. Setalvad and C.K. Daphtary. Certainly, their participation and exposition of problems and issues was instrumental in raising the quality of governance.

They have also been responsible for important legislative measures in diverse areas, including recognition to Sindhi as an official language, prevention of cruelty to animals, family planning, improvement of health and sanitation, energy management, public distribution and right to information.

Depressing fact

Nevertheless, have they been able to stop the erosion of the standards and conventions of parliamentary democracy and the rule of law? Have they been effective watchdogs against corruption, abuse and misuse of power and authority, scams and the like, ensuring stringent remedial action? From a quick review of the proceedings of the House, the depressing fact that emerges is that they have not used their prestige and fame to raise their voice against Government's commissions and omissions. On the contrary, most often, they are seen to have adopted the attitude of the three Chinese monkeys.

The expectation, for instance, that they would ensure initiation of action against bigwigs who have defrauded Banks of thousands of crores of rupees or that they would be the driving force in getting electoral reforms implemented have been belied. There are many such areas where they could have made a difference in the interest of the nation.

Many former nominated members themselves have given expression to their frustration at not being able to make their mark and give a push to projects in which they had special expertise. Is this disappointing state of affairs due to a hesitation on their part to put on the spot the Government which had been kind enough to nominate them, as frankly stated by one of the nominated members (Rashiduddin Khan) of the earlier era? This may, or may not, be the case, but what is clear is their difficulty in getting even time allocated for making their views known in the House.

A nominated member may, at the most, have five minutes allotted to him/her in each session, only to find that the chance is either crowded out, or the House is empty. Rarely does a member have the opportunity to have his private Bill included in the agenda, leave alone introduced or discussed.

What is the solution? Nominated members, along with like-minded colleagues, should form a pressure group and ask the Chairman to consider them as a special entity entitled to special consideration in the matter of allotment of time, inclusion of Bills, and so on. By sounding the alarm against misdeeds of the Government, they should demonstrate their commitment to rectitude propriety and probity.

B.S.RAGHAVAN