Lowering the voting age to eighteen (New Delhi, December 1988) RAJIV GANDHI (1944–1991)

Lowering the voting age to eighteen (New Delhi,
December 1988)
RAJIV GANDHI (1944–1991)

e announcement contained in this speech was of obvious significance for
Indian democracy as the lowering of the voting age immediately increased
the size of the electorate. Rajiv Gandhi was young and his image had a
special appeal for youth. e change made a huge number of young people
participate in the democratic process. What was surprising is that despite
the enormity of the decision it did not stir up a controversy. Nor did it win
plaudits for Rajiv Gandhi.

MAIN SPEECH

Let me say at the outset that the legislation that this government has

brought, is a major legislation as it is aimed at strengthening the roots of

our democracy. Our Indian democracy is unique in many ways. It is a

unique experiment which is of global interest. It is the first time that a

diverse society, with diverse cultures, with ethnically different people,

speaking different languages, inhabiting different regions, professing

different religions, and having different castes, has been brought under one

democratic system. In a sense it is the microcosm of the world as also a

demonstration to the world that the democracy is possible amongst a

diverse society such as ours which can be a model for an international

democracy for people to live together on the globe.

During these forty years, the experiment of Indian democracy has been

extremely successful—perhaps, the most successful in any developing

country—and I would like to thank and congratulate the people of India for

the success of this experiment.

D h f h l b f h d k

During these forty years, we have learnt a number of things and some weak

areas in our system have become noticeable, and it is necessary to correct

these areas. is Bill, for the first time in forty years, addresses itself to

major issues relating to electoral reforms. is government started the

process of bringing about electoral reforms, by first bringing the Anti-

Defection Bill. We followed that by regulating donations from companies,

by altering the Companies Act. We followed that by bringing in a Bill to

prevent the misuse of religious institutions. is is the fourth step that we

are taking during this Parliament.

is bill addresses a number of areas. I won’t go into all the details. e law

minister and other members have covered those details. But these are some

areas that I would like to touch. One of the most significant areas that this

Bill goes into is to preserve secularism in our country.

It is important to spend a minute on why secularism is important. It is

important for us to understand what we mean by secularism, because there

are some amongst us who, under the label of secularism, want to destroy

religion. Our secularism is not anti-religion, nor is it for destroying religion.

We must be very clear about that. I would like to say categorically that

anybody who thinks that secularism means the destruction of religion or an

anti-religion act, is doing a disfavour to the word secularism, is doing a

disfavour to our nation; and some who believe in that, should revise their

thinking, because it is dangerous for our country.

Secularism is essential because, in a pluralistic society such as ours, it is

essential to separate politics and government from religion. If we do not do

so, we run the gravest risk of disintegrating the country and destroying our

nation. Perhaps the effect will be much beyond just the effect that it will

have on the nation. We will lose the nation; but the world will lose an

experiment in building one humanity. So, the repercussions are much

greater than even those affecting our nation.

e path that Gandhiji and Panditji have put us on to, and Indiraji took us

on, has much greater goals than just those limited by our boundaries; and

we must not limit our vision by our boundaries. Our vision must go beyond.

So, secularism is one key word, and it is essential that secularism is brought

in every area of our activities. Elections and the electoral process is one such

very important area.

W k h fi h b h h B ll f h

We took the first step when we brought the Bill for preventing the misuse

of religious institutions. In this Bill, by requiring the political parties to

submit themselves to the Constitution of India, we are pushing them

further towards the secular goal. I feel here it is important for me to say that

when we push people towards secularism—and I am saying push people,

and not force people, because when we start forcing, then things snap;

people take hard decisions. We must coax them and bring them into the

mainstream, and that is what we are trying to do. We could have taken a

very hard stand. I have gone through the proceedings of the House. Some

members feel that much stronger action have been brought in. is was

considered by the cabinet.

We went into it in depth and, in balance, we felt that it was better to tread

softly along this path, because if we try to force, we may end up in a

situation where we will isolate a large section of our population and

deliberately cause fissiparous tendencies to develop. We have adopted the

way of pulling the people into the mainstream and convincing them that

this is the right way to go. We believe that by making political parties

submit themselves to the Constitution of India, we are only strengthening

our electoral process, our democracy and our nation. And any party that is

not willing to submit itself to the Constitution of India does not deserve to

be recognized as a political party…

An hon’ble member from the Opposition and an hon’ble member from our

side have recommended an amendment to bring in the full provision of the

Misuse of Religious Institutions Bill. We thought that it was already

included, but, perhaps, it was a little soft; it was covered, but not

completely. I have asked the law minister to bring in a government

amendment because there are some technical problems in the wording of

the two proposals. We will bring in a government amendment to cover this

area and I would like to thank both the members…

Another very important aspect of the bill is the protection that we have

sought for the weaker sections when they go to vote. As I said, our electoral

system, our democracy have functioned very well. But there are certain weak

areas; and one of the weak areas is that the feudal elements prevent the

weaker sections, the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, the minorities,

the women, from going out to vote. Sometimes they are prevented from

leaving their homes; sometimes they are prevented from actually getting to

h b h b h f d l l  f f h B

the booths by the feudal elements. is is, of course, one of the reasons. By

making booth capturing a cognizable offence and by making both capturing

a corrupt practice, we feel that the hands of the weaker sections will really

be strengthened. We have also listed a number of crimes which, if

committed, will debar people from contesting an election. We have

mentioned specifically those crimes which are antisocial and which are

demeaning of the dignity of a particular section of the people. It is, again,

the weaker sections against whom these crimes are committed and it is our

earnest endeavour to protect the weaker sections by bringing in these

provisions.

One major step that we are taking is reducing the voting age from twentyone

to eighteen.

We have full faith in the youth of India. e youth of India have

demonstrated their wisdom, their maturity in panchayat elections, local

body elections, and we feel that they are now ready to participate fully in the

democratic process. is amendment will bring in almost fifty million

people into the electoral system.

ere has been another area where there have been some differences

between what some parties have felt and what we have felt; what we have

brought in and what has been the question of the multi-member election

commission. We have full faith in the election commissioner and we feel

that anybody who wants a multi-member election commission seems to

have some doubts about the election commissioner. We have no doubts

about the integrity and independence of the election commissioner and

going to a multi-member election commission, we feel, would have meant

that we doubted the integrity of the election commissioner in some way. We

have no doubt about the integrity…

Having said that, let me also say that there have been a number of occasions

when the decision of the election commissioner has been contentious. e

Opposition has not agreed with many decisions and has made issues. We

too have not liked many decisions and have made issues. But the fact is that

it has been fairly universal and we have found that the election

commissioner was tied down by the lack of powers he had. We could keep

complaining. But because the system was as it was, he was not able to do

even what he wanted to do. So, we have thought that instead of going for a

multi-member commission, like has been suggested by certain parties, we

ld d h h h d f h l b

would instead strengthen the hands of the election commissioner because

we have full faith in him. is bill strengthens the hands of the election

commissioner and for the first time perhaps the election commissioner will

have the powers to deal with the task that has been given to him.

One more question had come up on identity cards. When we discussed this

in the cabinet, we very clearly gave our affirmation. In fact, we have cleared

identity cards. We will have multipurpose—whatever they are—identity

cards. ere are some problems on how it will be handled administratively;

what it will cost; how we will bear it and how we will deal with these two

areas. But we will start the process now. Because of the size of the country,

the size of the electorate and the other complications, we cannot say that we

will complete the whole process before the next elections or according to a

time schedule, but I am very keen that the process is put into motion

rapidly. In the initial stages we will have to learn in the process of putting

this through, but we would like to see that it gets through quickly. We will

overcome the difficulties and we will try and have identity cards as soon as

possible.

Amongst the many points that have been raised during this debate I would

like to refer to only two: the first is state funding. e problem is not

whether there is state funding or not. e problem as I understand it, is the

question of the money power in elections, let me say very clearly from

experience. I am very clear that our people are much too clever and much

too wise to be misled by money power. Never has money power been the

deciding factor in an election in this country. is is my feeling. If some

people feel that our electorate can be misled by money power, I think they

are totally wrong. It is only the politicians who sometimes feel that by

spending more money they can do something. But our electorate is much

too wise for that. state funding in no way changes the amount of money

that is being used. In fact, it will only increase the amount of money that is

out there for electoral use. It will not reduce the raising of money for

elections in any way. So, I do not see state funding tackling the issue of the

cost of elections in any way. If it did, we would have brought it here. But, I

do see a need for trying to reduce the cost of elections. If the hon’ble

members have a positive suggestion on that we will definitely consider it.

But nothing concrete has come to us on that issue yet. Let me once again

say that I am very clear in my mind that we cannot buy the electorate of

India. e electorate of India is much too independent and wise for that.

S h d h d I h k d d dd

Sir, the second point that was raised—I think it does need addressing—is,

some members have felt that this Bill has not addressed the core issues and

has addressed only the peripheral issues. Well, I feel some of these members

are suffering from what could best be called peripheral myopia.

Let me say very clearly that this Bill is a major Bill. It is a major electoral

reform. I would go to the extent of calling it historical and revolutionary,

and significantly, we have brought it in the centenary year of Panditji. It will

strengthen the roots of our democracy and it re-establishes the faith of the

Congress in the youth of India and in the wisdom of the people of India…