Adhering to ‘Decency, Dignity and Decorum’ in politics : Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

 Adhering to ‘Decency, Dignity and Decorum’ in politics

Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

The Pioneer (07-01-2021)

Vice President of India M Venkaiah Naidu speaking in one of the important meetings said, that, ‘Decency, Dignity and Decorum’ are the three ingredients of democracy and they will be upheld only through adherence to three ‘Ds’ namely, ‘Debate, Discuss and Decide’. Any sane person will agree that for a democracy to be vibrant and functional, political leaders across and above the party lines should adhere to decency, dignity and decorum especially when they speak in public and when they refer to their dignified opponents.

Few political party leaders seem to have either forgotten this cardinal principal or they are not aware of it while making their statements in public. This trend seems to be catching up, of late, more in the Telangana State. In the recent past, soon after the by poll in Dubbaka and later during and after the GHMC polls, state head of a national party is continuously spitting venom against the Chief Minister in a language that is crossing all permissible limits of decency. He is personally attacking the CM and members of his family in a very filthy, unparliamentary and highly unbecoming language, which is, not expected of anyone more so a political leader. Political parties and their leaders may sharpen their political strategies to gain upper hand over each other but mud-slinging is highly deplorable.

In our country there are umpteen number of instances where in, some young leaders when lost their cool and used some offensive language against their opposition leaders, were reprimanded by their own senior leadership. For instance, after the emergency and after the first ever non-congress government was formed at the center, in 1977, the then Union Industries Minister George Fernandez came to Hyderabad and addressed public meeting in Musheerabad and at RTC X roads. As is his wont he went hammer and tongs against the then opposition leader Indira Gandhi describing her as a ‘perennial liar’. When it was reported to the then Prime Minister Morarji Desai, he called up George to control from using such phrases, as it would humiliate a senior politician of the stature of Indira Gandhi who was a former PM. Instead, Morarji Desai advised George to reframe as Mrs Gandhi ‘seldom speaks truth’. Such was the way politics used to be in those days and Morarji was an exception.

Couple of months ago, when many opposition leaders made fun of Prime Minister Narendra Modi when he urged the people to light a candle and beat the utensils during the initial days of Corona Pandemic, CM KCR at a media conference openly condemned it and said that PM should not be criticized in that manner and he even asked the DGP to book cases against those indulging in the mockery of PM. Like Morarji KCR is also an exception.

The opposition leader now in question in Telangana has the habit of using choicest epithets against CM KCR. He uses expressions such as ‘We will not leave him (KCR) even if he prostrates on ground before our party leadership. We will send him and his family members to jail even if he tries to please our national leaders’. He always refers to KCR, the CM in singular terms. His language and abuses are often putting his own party leaders to embarrassment. This person should learn from some past and present stalwart leaders from his own party. Interestingly even the national leadership of that person is conspicuously silent on the utterings of that person. This sort of unfortunate developments in politics in a democracy like India is unhealthy. 

When PV Narasimha Rao was the prime Minister, the then Leader of the Opposition Atal Behari Vajpayee used to criticize the government day in and day out but with lot of respect and decency. It was PV who as the PM had deputed Vajpayee to speak on the Kashmir issue at the UN to everyone’s surprise. That was how mutual respect among politicians prevailed then.

However, criticism was not uncommon even then. As a Parliament Member from the opposition, Vajpayee used to criticize Nehru’s government inside and outside the Parliament. In one of his speeches inside the Parliament, Vajpayee said that, he sees both Churchill and Chamberlain in Nehru which evoked peals of laughter from none other than Nehru himself. During the Janata government, when Nehru’s portrait was removed from the Ministry of External Affairs office, Vajpayee took strong objection to it and got it back to the office. Such was the mutual respect the ruling and opposition had then. It also speaks a lot about their personality.

We have seen that in our country there used to be informal practice of the Prime Minister or the state Chief Ministers convening all party meetings to discuss on some very important issues or policies of the government. This is to ensure that the decisions taken by the government get consensus among the political parties for the public good.

All those who witnessed the Legislature sessions of the then united Andhra Pradesh, often experienced the treasury benches discussing with the Opposition members on questions and answers to be tabled in the House. This was to make sure that the answers to the question tabled should have adequate and truthful information for the general public. The floor management which was the duty of the Government Chief Whip and Whips was very successfully handled in earlier days. Now in these days even if it is attempted by ruling party, its doubtful whether opposition responds in right spirit.

Coming back once again to the opposition leader in question, even in the united AP state and after the formation of Telangana State the political leaders have not stooped down to the level of the leader in question. He seems to believe that use of filthy and unparliamentarily language would attract people. People may get attracted to the filthy language but it will not make him a true people’s leader in the long run.

         A political party more than anything else is evaluated by the way its leadership functions. If the leadership’s behavior is decent, cultured and with some ethical standards, they are respected by the people. A filthy language is only serving as a free entertainment show. And such shows will withdraw public interest and cannot motivate or influence them. The name-calling and body shaming is not at all encouraged in the public life. One may criticize the political opponents on issues but not stoop down to the level of making baseless allegations and abuses. When TN Seshan was the CEC, he made it a punishable offence.  

But who can teach these ‘fly-by-night operators in politics’ to behave properly? If only their party seniors can induce some manners, culture and decency to this type of foul-mouthed leaders then there may be some change. Maybe he does not want to worry about decorum that is not natural to him!

Maybe it is high time now in our country to redefine what is Parliamentary language and what is un-parliamentary one? This is important as more and more political leaders are indulging in a language that can never be called decent or in tune with dignity and decorum.

(With inputs from VJM Divakar)