May 20, 2007
Democratic Reform in UP Elections

Association for Democratic Reforms, in collaboration with numerous NGOs and civic society groups in UP undertook a massive effort for greater electoral awareness and transparency during these elections - a report.

Elections to the 403 seats of the 15th Uttar Pradesh Assembly were held in 7
phases. In the sweltering heat of the Gangetic heartland, the elections
after three consecutive hung assemblies generated enough heat to keep the
country on its toes for two and a half months. Uttar Pradesh is the most
populous state in the country with an approximate population of 170 Millions
and an electorate of about 114 millions. UP is also one of the most under
developed states of the country with high crime rate and abysmally low human
development index. For the last 15 years, the state has been under several
different political alliances with none of them being able to complete their
term.

The BSP has won a majority of seats and contenders like BJP and SP have got
much less seats than expected by political pundits. A look at the vote share
of the two front runners tells us that the BSP has increased its share by
about 10 points, where as the SP has increased it fractionally over the last
elections. The parties that suffered most are BJP and the group called other
parties. While the results have confounded pollsters and political analysts
and led to renewed debates on social engineering and caste arithmetic much
less attention has been paid to the consequences of a civil society led
movement for electoral reforms. I think the UP election process and the
electoral result reflect an emergent trend towards citizens demanding
increasing accountability of their prospective representatives. Are we
witness then to a fundamental change in the way the citizens relate to the
whole process of electoral democracy, shifting to a deeper and more
participatory relationship. This article is about a silent revolution of
citizens, which has resulted in changing not only the language but the
grammar of politics in the Hindi heartland.

*Democratic Innovations*

In recent years there have been significant developments in Indian
democracy, in terms of civil society participation in the electoral process.
Disclosure laws such as affidavits along with nomination papers detailing
criminal antecedents, assets, liability, and education of candidates, the
right to information Act, etc. have made it possible for citizens to seek
accountable governance from their elected representatives.

Since the path breaking Supreme Court judgment of 2002 ensuring the right of
the voter to know the background of the candidate one is voting for, as a
fundamental right of the citizen, civil society organizations like the
Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), have been active in creating
*citizens
election watch* bodies in various states. The objective of such monitoring
bodies has been to aid the citizen voter in making an *informed
choice.*After a long struggle, in Bihar assembly elections 2005, the
work of
citizens election watch bore some success. Despite having about 49%
candidates with pending criminal cases in the assembly, the chief minister
elect announced that anyone with even a single pending criminal case against
him/her would not get a seat in the cabinet. This was not only a triumph of
citizens' vigilance, but also a wake up call for political parties putting
up such candidates in the fray.

*Citizens Election Watch *

Prior to UP, assembly elections in West Bengal, Assam, Tamil Nadu,
Pondicherry, Uttarakhand and Punjab had seen a down ward trend in candidates
with pending criminal cases contesting and winning. But UP was going to be
the test case. Known for it's deeply entrenched caste based politics and
overwhelming presence of MLAs with criminal charges pending against them,
the state stood at the top of violent crimes and crime against SC and STs in
India. According to an affidavit filed in the Allahabad High Court by the
Government of UP in 2005, 206 sitting MLAs (out of a total of 403) had
pending criminal charges against them, of which 159 had charges for
committing heinous crimes. All the political parties had a share in this
total. (SP 66/143, BSP 31/98, BJP 31/88, RLD4/13, IND 10/16).

Political parties justified the presence of persons with criminal background
by trotting out well worn arguments," If we don't give such candidates
tickets other parties will give them the tickets and we will lose the seat
(winnability argument), " Criminal Charges have been foisted by the ruling
party on political opponents or while undertaking public protests
("political vendetta" argument) or" No one can be called a criminal till the
charges have been proved in a court of law (Technical argument ). The most
brazen justification being " So what if they are criminals - they have been
elected by the people'. It is however public knowledge in Bihar and UP that
for a criminal getting elected to the assembly has meant protection from the
law and especially, from the dreaded STF's encounter deaths. As it happens
UP tops the list in extra judicial killings in the country.

Six months prior to the elections in UP, ADR started its work among the
civil society organizations, opinion makers and political parties.
Workshops, small meetings in district head quarters, meeting with news paper
editors, eminent citizens of the state, and the electronic media stirred up
a muffled debate in the civil society circles. What will happen if people
know about the candidate's background; whom should they vote for then; how
will election watch stop the caste allegiance of the voters; will anything
change in this country; who will go against the *Bahubalis*' diktats and who
will protect us? ADR pursued a non partisan line through out saying changes
do come when people own the process and in reality reach the information
about candidates to the voter of the country in villages and kasbahs and let
them decide who will benefit them most. The arrogance of the educated class
in our country, of course, prevented it from accepting the fact that the
hungry, frail, uneducated voter of our country knew what is good for her.

Two conditions insisted upon by the ADR during the campaign from the
participating organizations and groups were a) political non-partisan ship
of the participant organizations, and b) complete financial transparency of
the organizations. Since the effort was a voluntary civil society
initiative, it was expected that each participant organization would take
care of expenses arising in their own area of activity. Several statewide
tours, hundreds of village and small town level meetings resulted in getting
on board 200 odd organizations who believed that in order to usher in
change, one must be a part of it, not a bystander.

A high level committee comprising eminent and concerned citizens of the
state, under a retired DG Police of the state, known for his integrity and
fearless uprightness was constituted. Each of the districts had several NGOs
along with lawyers, teachers and local citizens, who would hold meetings in
various localities informing people about the objective and usefulness of
election watch process, collect affidavits at the district head quarter, and
disseminate information about candidate background to voters, once the
affidavits are collated and analysed.

A thoroughly researched data base on the state of governance of UP was
prepared and along with previous election watch reports were distributed
widely. News papers carried informed articles on education, health,
corruption, law and order, hunger and human development. District level
correspondents were provided with region specific development data and were
encouraged to bring into focus issues specific to the region into the
political agenda of contesting parties.

Through out the state the election watch campaign tried to convince the
people that any issue, how ever local it may be, needs to be addressed by
the elected representatives and in order to take the issue to their
priority, citizen groups must unite for a better, clean and responsive
candidate who will work for them. The slogan that became the clarion call
for the campaign was – *Jo Daru Murga Bantega, woh sarkari khajana lutega;
jo kam kharch pe jeetega, woh janata ka bhala karega*. Advertisements
appeared in local dailies inviting people of the state to participate in the
election watch campaign.

Help line numbers were given, citizens were asked to seek affidavits from
the district electoral office and disseminate the information among voters.
Even before the election dates were announced, the murmurs of a public
debate was heard in the Kasbah tea stalls of UP. The grounds for Clean UP
Campaign had been laid. The story of the campaign in the State can be best
illustrated by the example of Bundelkand region of UP.

*Bundeli Jan Ki Katha Aur Vyatha*

It is said that every 16th person in the world belongs to UP. The state,
even after its bifurcation, has 70 districts, 403 assembly constituencies
and 80 Lok sabha seats. About 32% of its population lives below poverty
line. In the last three years 188 hunger deaths have been reported in the
state. The worst affected region perhaps is Bundelkhand. in 2006 alone, in
the Bundelkhand region, 119 farmers had committed suicide. If one goes by
the local civil society data, in the last three years about 600 farmers
suicides had taken place in the region. Budelkhand, consisting of six
districts, Jalaun, Banda, Hamirpur, Jhansi, Lalitpur Mahoba, and Chitrakoot,
is a drought prone area.

The sorry state of the farmers of this region can be imagined from the fact
that, despite such large scale loss of human life due to debt consequent on
repeated crop failures, the area has not yet been even declared a Drought
Affected Area by the Govt. Being on the border of Madhya Pradesh, this
region is also famous for its Dacoits. Over the last decade or so Dadua and
Thokia, two rivals, have been ruling over the region. It was said that
without support from these gentlemen, no political party could win any of
the 21 seats of this region. In fact during our travel through Bundelkhand,
we were shown the *firmans *asking people to vote for a certain party or
candidate or else…. Villagers did speak of the repercussion of not abiding
by the Dacoits orders. In the last assembly elections Dadua came out in
support of a party, which won majority of the seats. This time both Dadua
and Thokia went a step ahead. Dadua's brother, Bal Kumar was given a ticket
from the Samajwadi party, and Thokia's mother Piyaria Devi was put up by
Rashtriya Lok Dal. The challenge in Bundelkhand was to show the people of
this region that it is possible to break the clutches of fear and as
citizens of the country, get a candidate elected, who would represent them
and address their problems.

A Voter Awareness Campaign – *Bundeli Jan Ki Katha Aur Vyatha *-- was
organized in 21 constituencies of Bundelkhand Region. The main concerns of
this campaign were to highlight the drought issue and administrative apathy
towards the region. During the campaign meetings, Nukkad nataks etc were
organized at village level and a 21 Question Format was given to candidates
of each constituency. They were requested to fill the formats and give their
views on the issues raised by the people of Bundelkhand. People also asked
them if they were elected then what would they do to improve the condition
of Bundelkhand. 36 candidates filled the form and said that they will work
to remove drought and livelihood crisis in the region and signed a pledge.

Among these, 18 candidates who had made Bundelkhand drought as the main
issue during their campaign promise, won. That is, 18 candidates out of 36
in 21 seats were elected because they promised to take up the issue of the
people. Piyaria Devi lost, so did Bal Kumar, despite the firmans of their
respective outlaw kins. Well, Bal Kumar did lose by a thin margin of 454
votes, but the fact is he lost the election despite Dadua's support. The
election commission has had a big role in this. The deployment of central
forces in the area, for a longer period than was done else where, made it
possible for a large number of poor villagers to come out and exercise their
franchise. Its promise to conduct a free and fearless election in UP was
substantiated in the election results of Bundel Khand.

*Criminalisation and Politics*

Criminalisation of politics was the central issue, which dominated Citizens
campaign in the UP assembly elections. The *UP election watch *collected and
analysed 5940 affidavits filed by the candidates in seven phases of the
election. There were 882 candidates ( 14.84%) candidates who had pending
criminal cases against them. If we look at the combined percentages/figures
of all the seven phases, out of total number of candidates with pending
criminal cases, major political parties account for *59*%, other parties *22
*% and independents *19*%. Among the contestants, 97 were accused of
murder, 204 of attempt to murder, 142 of cheating, 63 of dacoity and 51 of
kidnapping. The ranking of the major political parties in terms of
percentage of candidates with criminal cases was as follows-- SP (38%), BSP
(32%), BJP+AD (29%), INC (22%) and RLD (14%). This is significant because,
it shows the level of dependence of political parties on such candidates and
their belief that having pending criminal cases adds to the winnability
factor of such candidates.

The analysis of the final election results, however throws some surprises.
There are 155 elected candidates (38.55%) who have pending criminal charges.
Out of these 91(58.70%) are charged with such heinous crimes, which, if
convicted, would fetch them more than 5 years of prison terms. While during
the election it seemed that dependence of political parties in putting up
such candidates reflected their desperation to win, the results showed a
contrary trend. If we look at the main parties who have national and
regional stake, the number of candidates who lost despite having criminal
charges is astounding. Among the losers with pending cases, SP 101/148 (
68.24%), BJP has 83/101 (82.17%), BSP 60/128 (46.87%), Jan Morcha 23/23
(100%), LJP 17/17 (100%), NCP 8/8 (100%), RLD 33/37 (89.18%) and INC 78/87 (
89.65%). Is it still not clear that this time round in UP the voters have
rejected the tainted ones by voting decisively in favour of clean
candidates! This calls for a strategic debate in the think tanks of
political parties for a review of the criteria constituting *winnability*.

It is interesting to note that in terms of re-fielding candidates with
pending criminal cases, SP topped the list with 65 out of 66 such candidates
in the previous house, followed by BJP-22 and BSP-21. In fact 38% of
refielded SP candidates lost and strategically BSP gained the most out of
fielding new faces.

On the other hand, we must note that some of the big names in UP's crime
world have made it to the august house. DP Yadav, Raja Bhaiyya, Madan
Bhaiyya, Mukhtar Ansari, Amar Mani Tripathi, Akhilesh Singh, Dhananjay
Singh, Sushil Singh, all have won with huge margins ( ranging from 17000
votes to 53000, the highest margin being in favour of Raja Bhaiyya). Most of
them have in fact retained their traditional seats.

At the same time, Pavan Pandey (the candidate with 63 criminal cases), Hari
Shankar Tiwari (who had won six times previously and whose criminal records
have been lost according to the affidavit submitted by the UP Govt itself),
Ashraf (Atiq Mohammad's brother, who is accused of killing Raju Pal. In fact
it is Pal's wife Puja Pal who has defeated the Don's brother this time), Bal
Kumar (Dadua's brother), Sujit Singh Belwa (the imprisoned don who was in
media focus because his wife and minor children were going door to door to
campaign for him), Thakur Prakash Singh (The Apna Dal Candidate with 45
cases, who used to be Raja Bhaiyya's right hand man till a few days back and
fell out with him), and Piyaria Devi (Dacoit Thokia's mother) have all lost.
In all the 15th UP assembly has 38.46% members who have pending criminal
cases in comparison to 51.11% in the previous house. Do we see here a
glimmer of a trend towards decriminalization of electoral politics?

Yet when Mayawati selected her cabinet this is what came out:

- 22 out of 41 ministers (54%) have pending criminal cases against
them.
- 16 out of 41 (39%) have cases pending against them for heinous
crimes that would fetch them more than two years of imprisonment if
convicted.
- 10 out of the 16 cabinet ministers (62%) have pending criminal cases
against them.
- 8 out of 16(50%) have heinous crime charges against them.
- 12 out of the 25 ministers of state, i.e. 48% have pending cases
against them.
- 8 out of 25, i.e. 32% have been charged for heinous crimes.
- 4 BSP MLAs have SC/ST Act charges against them. One of these,
Awadhesh Verma, who belongs to SC community, has been made a minister.

*Money and Muscle*

Another interesting aspect of the UP election was the role of money power.
The election commission had made it very difficult for political parties to
spend money in the usual buntings and processions. Observers were made to
move in the constituency without the knowledge of the District magistrate
and those candidates who indulged in ostentatious spending were issued show
cause notices. The major avenue of spending seemed to have been
advertisements in newspapers and electronic media. The joke in political
circles of UP was that whatever the media had lost in terms of revenue in
the disastrous exit of the Indian team from the world cup, was made up from
the advertising revenue from Samajwadi Party. Except the BSP, all the major
parties spent some money in advertising.

In all there were 463 candidates who had declared assets worth more than Rs
1 Crore. Out of these 115 ( 24.83%) have won. And among these 115, 48 have
pending criminal cases against them. The order of fielding crorepati
candidates by major political parties is exactly the same order as that of
candidates with pending cases. A mere coincidence? Despite this it needs to
be pointed out that V.M. Singh, of INC, (Puranpur) who happened to be the
richest candidate of all (Rs. 374 crores of declared assets) and had the
added advantage of 5 serious pending cases against him, has lost. In terms
of amount of asset, among the top ten richest candidates of the election, it
was Congress, which had 5 candidates in the list, out of which only 1 won.

Sheer money power does not work, nor does sheer muscle power. V.M. Singh is
the exception, which proves the rule that a combination of money and muscle
certainly enhances the chances of winning by 3 folds. This is borne out by
an analysis of the winners of last 5 assembly elections in the country. This
means dependence on money and muscle power still remains the criteria for
considering winnability. And political parties do fall for it while
distributing tickets.

There is nothing wrong with being a crorepati, except for the fact that
without a vigilant EC, it would tend to queer the pitch and not provide a
level playing field to all the contestants. It's like lowering the basket
for one team in a basketball match because it has money. Use of money power
in election affects the fundamental principles of democracy and universal
franchise and shifts the balance in favour of the rich. By the way the 48
winner crorepatis who also have pending criminal cases against them include
all the big Dons mentioned above. It is common knowledge that the main fount
of political corruption is in the use of unaccounted money during elections.
It is time that the policy makers in the country take the issue of state
funding of elections seriously and plug the loopholes that allow black money
to have a say in electoral politics.

*Strengthening Democracy: The EC Style*

The experience of UP elections would not be complete without a word about
the role of the EC. This was by far the biggest exercise in any single state
taken up by the EC. A massive exercise in manpower management and logistics
entailed detailed and meticulous planning. The EC was aware that not only
does it have to ensure that the common voter of UP gets to the polling booth
without intimidation, but the state bureaucracy too operates in an impartial
manner. A bureaucracy, which has been put up by the ruling party and is
known for its favoritism tasted the wrath of EC when it removed the Chief
Secretary and the DGP for attending a ruling party function. But the lower
bureaucracy was still a tough nut to crack.

*A Message to the Bureaucrats*

The UP Election watch met the EC prior to elections and requested the
commission to ensure that affidavits were provided on demand by District
authorities to the election watch representatives. Letters were faxed to
all the 70 district electoral officers informing them about the Supreme
Court judgment and the consequent EC orders making it compulsory for
electoral officials to provide affidavits to citizens on payment of
photocopying charges. The early procurement of affidavits was crucial to the
whole exercise of analysis and dissemination of information to the voter
prior to the polling day.

The hurdle came in the first round of elections itself. In Bundelkhand
region, DMs of Banda, Hamirpur, Lalitpur, Mahoba and Etawa refused to oblige
the Election watch members on the ground that no such order exists, or they
were too busy to oblige a citizen's democratic rights. The standard
procedure of refusal was like this--- The DM upon hearing from the EC would
pass the order to the concerned ADM; the ADM would not be available in
office and would not give time; once he is found out, the normal query was –
do you want to take our jobs—the EC is here for two months only, after that
what will happen to us. One articulate ADM, upon being pestered by an
enthusiastic EW representative said: *Loktantra gaya tel lene, hum yahan
aapke naukri nahin kar rahein hain*.

The complaints were systematically noted and forwarded to the EC. The next
day, the bureaucrats woke up to a very people friendly morning. They
searched for the cell number of the election watch person and politely asked
them to come and collect the affidavits. *Complain kyun kar te hain. Hum log
to aapke sewa main lage hain*. After that in the rest of the six phases no
DM dared to say no. One order accompanied by the will to force compliance
could change decades long practices of abuse of power, bias and
secretiveness. *This single factor of government servants actually obliging
the public, as of right without begging or bribes is a lasting impact of the
election watch exercise. The stories of being able to get information from
their closed fists will pass into folk lore as it passes from mouth to mouth
and this is the lasting legacy of the election watch. *. In fact this
election is historical in the sense that for the first time not a single
life was lost due to violence. The EC deserves all the credit.

*Taking Time Out for People*

In Sonbhdra District, there is a village called Raup gaon. This village has
a population of about 500 and is inhabited by ghasia tribes people. These
tribals are famous for their Karma dance and mostly earn a livelihood by
manual labour. They have been displaced from the Kanhar Dam project and now
occupy a patch of forestland near Robertsganj, the district head quarter.
The village was in media glare following the death of 18 children due to
hunger last year. Sonbhadra is a naxal-infested area where the various
groups had called for boycott of elections. During election watch meetings,
the villagers requested that despite their repeated pleas the district
administration has not issued voter identity cards to them.

A list of eligible voters was prepared and sent to the EC with the request
that identity was part of their struggle for dignity and a voter card would
go a long way in rehabilitating their faith in democracy. The elections were
on, and it was not certain whether the EC would have time to look into this
matter. On our next visit to the village, after 10 days, ecstatic villagers
who were proudly displaying their voter cards surrounded us. Voter card was
a matter of identity and dignity for them. After being kicked around for
years, there is a permanent address, and no one can now prevent them from
voting nor can any one throw them out of the village. They have chosen to
side with democracy rather than take up a gun, as is the norm in Sonbhadra .
These gestures signify the commitment of the constitutional body to the
spirit of democracy. On behalf of civil society, the EC deserves three loud
Cheers

In conclusion, here are some of the exciting trends that reflect the
maturing of the Indian electorate. Political Parties need to introspect on
their strategy and given the strong demand for clean candidates, they need
to back up the credibility of candidates by vouching for the authenticity of
their affidavits. Despite being a caste-ridden society UP has voted
decisively breaking down all caste arithmetic. Criminalistion, use of black
money, and empty slogans have not paid dividends. The voice of the voter has
prevailed.

*Bibhu Mohapatra is Coordinator, ADR. He can be contacted at
bibhumohapa...@gmail.com