On constitutional provisions for parliamentary strength – Part II
Impact on the previously mentioned social contract demands greater scrutiny when constitutionally-established political boundaries are overstepped for personal gain, an insight that is necessarily the demise of a governmental institution simply because, in violation of the social contract, it has essentially violated the restraints of the framework within which it exists: the Constitution.
It is not necessary to delve further into this matter, for when the example presented by the actions of A. Raja – and the UPA-II coalition that strutted him – is considered, it becomes clear that even as the minister overstepped his liberties to cause an unequal distribution of wealth resulting in a loss to the exchequer to the tune of Rs. 1,76,000 crore, the social contract stood annulled and thereby rendered the governmental institution meaningless.
While this may seem like a direct conclusion of commonsensical reasoning, the underlying status quo is that the polity is disassembled given the frailty of the morality upon which it is founded. The selfsame morality also implies that the leader must lead by example, and if unable to do so, must step down, lest the people are moved to anarchical tendencies. Revolution is, of course, an alternate recourse.
Currently, however, the dismal state of affairs seems to present no threat to the people of India – a clear indication of the reliance of governance on the parliamentary strength. Consider how, even as corruption runs rampant in parliamentary and legislative circles, the demise of the government is not as imminent as it should seem; furthermore, it seems stabilized simply by the revolutions – again, as the result of a violation of the social contract – that raged to establish it.
While this may have delayed the onset of a proletarian uprising as well as a replacement of the coalition that rules at the Centre, does this historical “rein” present any threat that contributes simply in the form of a cushioning against political crime?