LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Abhishek Mawle (x)     15 December 2010

Amendent in Constitution

Direct Consensus democracy

 

The advent of Electronic Voting Machine, Internet, Mobile phones etc. We can easily bring direct consensus democracy through Electronic Voting Machine/Internet/Mobile Phone etc to India as is done in Switzerland successfully for the past several years since 1890. The need of the hour for most of the democracies across the world is to transition from representative democracy to Direct Consensus democracy.

 

1.)    I have a suggestion for it by introducing a new constitution with bicameral parliament like the one we have right now. Important difference would be the upper house would comprise of engineers, graduates, post graduates, doctors, arts, commerce, finance and other qualified experts from various fields and walks of life who would be duly elected by graduates across the country in election over internet by use of Virtual Private Network set up by election commission of India.

 

2.)    The lower house would comprise of elected representatives elected by rest of the people. In order to pass a law, legislation or bill both the houses need to agree by simple majority.

 

3.)    In case they do not then the bill is not passed.

 

4.)    In case the bill is passed and the people are satisfied it will become law.

 

5.)    If people are dissatisfied they can get a referendum by getting signatures of 50,000 citizens and then invitation for suggestion or recommendation from citizens from all parts of India would be invited on a national website, top 10 popular suggestion would be judged by calling graduate citizens across the country to vote on them after deciding the top 10 suggestions.

 

6.)    The top 10 suggestion can be put to national referendum based on the most polled suggestion by people of India it should be made a law, legislation or bill and the earlier law/laws is to be replaced with it.

 

7.)    The citizens will have the power to recall any government official whether elected/selected or appointed including Judges.

 

8.)    The citizens of India can create/amend/delete any law/legislation or bill at any point of time by getting signatures of at least 50,000 citizens followed by the procedure mentioned above.

 

9.)    In case if there is a disagreement between graduate citizens and less educated citizens then the whole country will vote on a law proposed by less educated citizens and would be passed if it gets 70% votes majority.

 

 

 

10.)      The Prime Minster would be selected from a pool of nominations filed by the nominees themselves on the Prime Ministerial election website to be hosted by Election Commission of India along with each Prime Ministerial candidates Qualifications, Detailed Profile including past performance in posts elected or selected, his manifesto, his vision and his criminal record and all the statements needs to be duly verified and if any citizen notices any discrepancy in nomination documents of a nominee candidate he should inform the same to Election Commission of India and the commission needs to reply with in 48 hours of lodging of complaint and if found to be true the profile needs to be altered with new facts discovered along with a stiff penalty decided by the court.

 

11.)      The Prime Minister would be elected by people after going through all the profiles of Prime Ministerial Nominations in six months from the date of posting on the national website and after having a national media debate on media every third Sunday for Six months. The period of voting would be six months; the voting process would allow people to rate the candidates from 0-10 points. The top 10 nominees who win the highest number of points will be final nominees. once the top 10 nominees are known then there would be a nation wide election to chose one amongst them. The nominee who wins the highest number of votes will be declared Prime Minister for 10 Years. The Prime Minster can be recalled by the citizens at any point of time during his tenure by initiating recall election across the country, To initiate recall elections at least 1,00,000 Citizens need to sign a recall petition by citing the reasons about the same, once 1,00,000 signatures are attained the process needs to started within a month’s time and completed within three months.

 

12.)      The procedure for nomination of Chief Minister would be the same except that it would be conducted by State Election Commission.

 

13.)      The procedure for election of Chief Minister would be the same except that this would happen at the state level. To initiate recall of Chief Minister at least 50,000 Citizens from the respective state need to sign a recall petition by citing the reasons about the same, once 50,000 signatures are attained the process needs to started within a month’s time and completed within three months.

 

14.)      The transition from representative democracy should be done in a phased manner in order to prevent confusion first by implementing in the order mentioned Lok Sabha members, Rajya Sabha members, Prime Minister, Sate Legislative Assembly members, State Legislative Council members, Chief Minister, Muncipal Wards, Panchayat samithi and other electoral positions.

 

 The Ten fundamental rights recognised by the constitution would be

 

a)            Verifiable voting with receipt issued to voter along with his choices mentioned.

b)           The right to service.

c)            The right to information.

d)           The right to debate.

e)            The right to referendum.

f)             The right to recall elected/selected/appointed representatives.

g)            The right to create/amend/delete any law/legislation or bill.

h)            The right to equality.

i)              The right to freedom.

j)             The right to freedom from exploitation.

k)           The right to freedom of religion.

l)              Cultural and educational rights.

 

15.)      Political party system would be unconstitutional.

 

Questions or Suggestions are welcome about my proposed Modern Constitution of India. Doing the same thing again and again, expecting different results is insanity. Let us get rid of this nuisance.



Learning

 4 Replies

arun (advocate)     20 December 2010

we are going to publish a magzene and want your contribution. if you are intrested pl response soon. you may contact me on gtalk. my mail id is- bny2009@gmail.com. you are requested to join.

Democratic Indian (n/a)     20 December 2010

Mr. Mawle, good suggestions, I would broadly agree. But I think you have clubbed Fundamental Rights with Constitutional rights. In your list of rights there is no natural, human and fundamental rights to Life and Liberty, no natural, human and fundamental right to RKBA! If these rights are not included, all the rights enumerated by you, would carry no practical meaning. We would again become a defunct democracy, a banana republic the way we are today. If you want to follow Swiss model, do not forget that each and every citizen of that country keep arms, government supplies free arms and ammunition. Also do not forget the US 2nd Amendment. 2nd Amendment was not done due to some foolish reasons.

Abhishek Mawle (x)     22 December 2010

Democratic Indian, what is the meaning of RKBA and please suggest me the procedure to File PIL in the court with these suggestions and I personally think that the reason every Swiss citizen carries arms is because Europe always lives under the fear of Russian Bear so they have a system of draft through which every citizen is enrolled in the Army and later they have to bear arms to protect the nation whenever an emergency arises same use to apply to USA earlier but now I suppose there is no need for the law. As far as India is concerned we have a huge population I think our army and reserve forces are enough, we do not need every citizen to bear arms unless he is under threat from some one. Well as far as any deficiency in rights is concerned please enumerate them so I can modify my proposed modern constitution and once again please suggest me the procedure to File PIL and whether it would be better to approach High court or Supreme Court with this PIL.

Democratic Indian (n/a)     23 December 2010

 

"what is the meaning of RKBA"


It is short form of a natural right, a human right, a fundamental right that is called the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.


"I personally think that the reason every Swiss citizen carries arms is because Europe always lives under the fear of Russian Bear so they have a system of draft through which every citizen is enrolled in the Army and later they have to bear arms to protect the nation whenever an emergency arises same use to apply to USA earlier but now I suppose there is no need for the law."


Nothing new, I expected this reply. We Indians are so much brainwashed into thinking that having just some written Constitution will keep the democracy working in a healthy manner. But the facts before our eyes are just reverse of it. And belief that if things are not working, constitution needs to be changed or replaced. Nothing against you. Swiss people are not keeping arms due to some "threat" or "no threat". RKBA is the ultimate sign of freedom and democracy enjoyed by the people. If all the Swiss people are disarmed, how long will it take for their democracy to be transformed into the kind of banana democracy we have? Any idea? Please note all through the history, the trynanical people who feared real democracy were against armed citizens in their country. Hitler, Stalin, mafia, corrupt etc. always fear armed citizenry and do their best to brainwash them and keep them disarmed.


In USA also it is not due to any "threat" etc. it is due to matter of principles of democracy so that ultimate power lies with the people. They also never use Army for law and order problems because of principles. They are not like us, who at the drop of the hat call army for law and order problems. If ballot fails, they have the option of bullet as a last resort. A qualified U.S. citizen may purchase nearly any type of firearm, including fully automatic, artillery to any size, armored vehicles, suppressors etc. Federal law allows for this, although some individual States may have additional regulations. Full auto, and artillery require additional paperwork, but no license or permit.


 

A government that does not trust its honest, law-abiding, citizens with the means of self-defense is not itself worthy of trust. Laws disarming honest citizens proclaim that the government is the master, not the servant, of the people.


Do you see any sense in this, I see a lot of sense. I see this to be the most important right of the people. Other rights of the people are dependent on this right:


"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." - Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution


What is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them. This has been done all through the ages by the corrupt and the tyrants to consolidate power, who fear the armed people. Under various excuses they disarm the people to enslave them. Slaves we have become to the corrupt system in India. The criminals have practically taken over the democracy. Why and how? Because they are able to threaten and intimidate unarmed voters, also beause unarmed people are scared of contesting the elections. Can this be imagned in Switzerland or USA? In USA when President of America attends any public meeting, the people are legally allowed to carry fully loaded arms with them. The President is well within the range of firearms of the citizens. It is perfectly legal. Can you imagine this in India even though our President is a rubber stamp? Are you able to see any meaning in this? People are able to go armed into polling booths and cast their votes. Can booth capturing be ever imagined when voters are armed? Can criminals think of contesting elections by threatening voters?



Just having a democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well armed lamb contesting the vote. Freedom comes from the recognition of certain rights which may not be taken, not even by a 99% vote. And among those rights which also protects other rights is the fundamental Right to Keep and Bear Arms.


"As far as India is concerned we have a huge population"


What use is this "huge" disarmed population who cannot do anything practically useful?


"I think our army and reserve forces are enough"


Never any army of any country is ever enough. Do you remember the result of Third Battle of Panipat? The Maratha Army was considered  "invincible" and  "enough" by many people. It was well armed and well trained. It had the best and the latest French canons and other European weaponry of the time. But it was miserablly and completely defeated and around 3000 women were captured by Ahmad Shah Abdali to be sold in bazaars of Kabul. Jassa Singh Ahluwalia gathered a small force of around 2000 armed volunteers and attacked the camps of Abdali at midnight and rescued these women and had them escorted back to their families. Human behaviour is very much the same today. Never feel comfort in the idea that army etc. etc. etc. is there. Freedom of people is too precious to be kept in the custody of any army.


"we do not need every citizen to bear arms unless he is under threat from some one."


We as a nation have got so debased and brainwashed by the corrupt people and their propaganda, we have given up our rights and started thinking that keeping arms is not a matter of right but a matter of  "threat" or "no threat". Have you ever thought that if even 10% of the victims of 26/11 would have been armed, what would have been the results?


Keeping arms is very much a matter of right than anything else. The Indian Arms (Amendment) Bill (No.49 of 1953, which became Arms Act 1959) was introduced with the following objects:-


“(a) to exclude knives, spears, bows and arrows and the like from the definition of ‘arms’.


(b) to classify firearms and other prohibited weapons so as to ensure –

(i) (i) that dangerous weapons of military patterns are not available to civilians, particularly anti-social elements;


(ii) (ii) that weapons for self-defence are available for all citizens under license unless their antecedents or propensities do not entitle them for the privilege; and


(iii)(iii) that firearms required for training purposes and ordinary civilian use are made more easily available on permits;


(c) to co-ordinate the rights of the citizen with the necessity of maintaining law and order and avoiding fifth-column activities in the country;


(d) to recognize the right of the State to requisition the services of every citizen in national emergencies. The licensees and permit holders for firearms, shikaris, target shooters and rifle-men in general (in appropriate age groups) will be of great service to the country in emergencies,


The problem is that we have lost sight of the fact RKBA is a natural, human and fundamental right guaranteed by our Constitution, also we have lost sight of the objectives and reasons of Arms Act 1959. Arms Act 1959 was passed NOT to curb or restrict gun ownership from citizens but to co-ordinate their rights and encourage gun ownership. It can be ascertained from the objectives b(ii) and (c) highlighted in yellow above. These rights being co-ordinated by Arms Act 1959 are nothing but the fundamental rights of Self Defense and RKBA.


If you do not believe then please read and understand details of what I have said in the following:


1) https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Self-defense-for-the-women-of-crime-capital--28513.asp


2) https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/10th-December-Human-Rights-Day-28338.asp


3) https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/WHO-IS-CORRUPT-Why-naxalism-terrism-unemployment-poverty--28222.asp


"Well as far as any deficiency in rights is concerned please enumerate them so I can modify my proposed modern constitution"


Our Constitution is good enough. At the most it may need some minor amendments. It does not need any complete replacement. Instead we need to change our thinking. People should assert their rights that rightfully belong to them.


If you still want to go ahead with your idea I would suggest to incorporate the principles of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th Amendments. For details please refer: https://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1



"please suggest me the procedure to File PIL and whether it would be better to approach High court or Supreme Court with this PIL."


Please refer the following:

https://yedhulaprakash1.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/How-to-file-a-Public-Interest-Litigation-PIL--1966.asp

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/format-of-PIL-26957.asp

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/share_files/PIL-Potential-and-Problems-3855.asp

https://www.unilawonline.com/articles/public_interest_litigation.htm


It is better to approach High Court first. Please note that courts cannot amend the Constitution. Amendments to the Constitution  can be done by Parliament so long they do not violate the doctrine of basic structure of Constitution as said by Spreme Court. If Constitution needs to be changed radically or replaced completely, then formation of a Constituent Assembly would be needed.


‘The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest possible limits. ... and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.’’— Saint George Tucker, Judge of the Virginia Supreme Court 1803

 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register