Crime pays

A large number of persons with doubtful antecedents and a long record of accusations of criminal activities occupy seats in the elected legislative bodies in India. No one knows how to prevent their entry into these Houses since the registered political parties sponsor their candidatures. They succeed in obtaining endorsements from a majority in their assigned constituencies. There have been endless debates on this issue.

 Their entry began in 1977 when a large number of persons from rural backgrounds entered the Lok Sabha. The antecedents of some of them were suspect but none had their pictures pasted in the rogues’ gallery in any police station or elsewhere. But real change began with the 1980 election, when the Congress had to search for new faces. The old leaders were discarded with the second split in the Indian National Congress in January 1978 and the traditional durrie spreaders for the public rallies were picked up since they were the familiar faces. Late Congress leader Jagjivan Ram, who administered the oath to the new members of the 7th Lok Sabha, had then remarked that he could not find any familiar faces in the crowd. Of course, he was not referring to their background since very little was known about them. He was referring to their sartorial appearance, which was completely different from what Jagjivan Ram was used to seeing in his long years as a parliamentarian. But this change was not enough to hide the fact that the new leaders were a different kettle of fish. They did not come with clean records of public service but had managed the party nomination for different reasons.

The general belief is that such elements have bamboozled their way into the legislative bodies by using muscle power. However, that is not the whole truth since no one can influence large number of people to cast ballots in their favour by wielding the lathi or holding them at gunpoint. Such public display would certainly spur the State into action...at the very least for the sake of satisfying the Election Commission.

No, they succeeded because they were successfully operating parallel but efficient systems of administration that instantly delivered justice and helped out a larger number of people. They used threats to do so. Whether it was Hari Shankar Tiwari in Gorakhpur, or Shahbuddin in the Shivan district of Bihar, or Pappu Yadav also from Bihar, they knew how to break the corrupt, even though it is difficult to justify the actions they used. Their activities were a threat not only to the state administration but also to the corrupt. No wonder then they were also quick to ensure that a plethora of complaints were filed against the mafia dons so that the law enforcement agencies had an upper hand over them. Mohamed Lateef of Ahmedabad could win the election to the Corporation from five wards even when under detention, without a campaign. It was well known that the poor flocked to his residence to seek help of various kinds - for things that the corrupt and insensitive administration would not do. Yusuf Patel, who enjoyed a reputation as an international arbiter of smugglers in the East, had hundreds lined up at his residence in Mumbai in the ‘60s – all seeking help of various kinds for which they never went away disappointed. This might not justify their entry into the legislative bodies, but the fact remains that such elements have the endorsement from a majority in their constituency so that they can occupy their seats.

These leaders cannot be prevented from contesting as long as they are not convicted but are only accused of criminal activities. The Constitution provides them the right to contest. But their hold can be broken by sensitive administrations, which attend to the needs of the common man. If the poor can get attention and service from the legal authorities, Hari Shankar and the likes of him will not be able to wield their influence to get into legislative bodies. The political parties that are equally guilty of sponsoring these candidates of doubtful character must first stop the practice themselves before blaming others.