It might be more than 60 years since the first Battalion of the Somerset Light Infantry left India signalling the end of British colonial rule. However, many people refuse to abandon colonial vestiges, like an extended retinue that goes against the basic tenets of a democratic republic. It was this colonial hangover and feudal mindset that the Supreme Court was chastising while observing that red beacons used by politicians and government officials on vehicles have become a “fashion and status symbol”. The apex court’s observation, on Thursday, that state governments should drastically cut down on the number of red beacons used on VIP vehicles concurs with the sentiments of many people who are victims of the traffic violations these vehicles create. The SC Bench has suggested that if necessary the Motor Vehicle Act should be amended to restrict the number of officials entitled to use red beacons.
While it is a positive sign that in the recent few months the court has taken note of this grotesque display of ‘importance’, experience suggest that it is too much to expect our politicians to see reason. In the past efforts have been taken to reduce the number of politicians enjoying a security cover but these have had a temporal effect. In many countries except for the president and a few others the rest are not provided with security cover. In India, unfortunately, in some states even panchayat heads are given a security detail.
While in 2009 Prime Minister Manmohan Singh apologised to the family of a person who could not access the emergency area of PGIMER, in Chandigarh, because the PM was attending a function at the hospital, on a daily basis there might be many patients who are caught in traffic snarls because of roads being blocked for VIP movement. Such attitudes and practises need to change. Imposing a greater fine, as suggested by the SC, might be one option. Politicians and government officials need to shed the skewed logic that red beacons and security cover reflect a high status and level of importance, and be more accessible to the people who they are duty-bound to serve.
(An edited version of this appeared in the Hindustan Times on Monday, April 8)
No comments:
Post a Comment