प्रजा अधीन राजा समूह | Right to Recall Group

अधिकार जैसे कि आम जन द्वारा भ्रष्ट को बदलने/सज़ा देने के अधिकार पर चर्चा करने के लिए मंच
It is currently Sat Apr 21, 2018 2:52 pm

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


फोरम के नियम ; Forum rules


ये फोरम केवल कमेन्ट करने के लिए है ; यहाँ आप नया थ्रेड शुरू नहीं कर सकते | कृपया कमेन्ट करने से पहले फोरम के सारे नियम यहाँ पढ़ें - viewtopic.php?f=19&t=1098

This is a comment only forum. You cannot start a new thread here. Please read the rules of the forum before posting - viewtopic.php?f=19&t=1098



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
SR. No. Author Message
1
PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 9:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 3:17 pm
Posts: 61
Law and drafting is plain common sense

1. Law is EASIER than 8th standard maths. It is 10 times simple than software code you write everyday. All this hooplaa that law is tough, commons cant understand it etc is created by intellectuals who who want to keeo commons unaware about law.

2. In law, there are two parts : techinical issues, strategic (game theory type) and legal issues. eg you are reading law on software copyrights. Then you need to understand what software is. Same way, if you are reading laws on construction, you need to know ABC of construction. Now, trust me, we engineers and ordinary unskilled labor know more about technical issues than judges. (Most judges are BA (sociology) , and you know what caliber of a typical BA (soc)when it comes to understand technical issues.) Second issue you need to focus is given a law, many ppl may try to break it (game theory type issues). Again, you know that enginners and unskilled labors are better than BA(soc) in understanding game-theory type issues.

3. Over 99% cases in India, techinical issue is TRIVIAL. They deal with threatening, brawls, beatings, other plain vanilla violent crimes, simple finanicial frauds etc. Even an illiterate knows issues mattering the case.
to fix a problem, one has to understand the problem and the tools available to solve it.

4. So just start reading the law. Mind you, many times, lawyers/judges and law-makers DELIBERATELY use clumsy difficult words,. They also have habit of use long long sentences having tons of commas, semicolons etc. This is ONLY to create confusion and make us commons feel inferiors. So dont pay attention to their heavy words, usless concepts and long sentences. Replace the the words by simpler words. Break the long sentences into 2-more sentences. After that you will see that law is trivialer than 8th std maths.

5. Many times while reading laws, you will need to read cases and their judgements. The judgements judges, perticularly India's HCjs/SCjs write are like poems --- full of glossy words, hollow in contents. Pls keep in mind that so called landmark judgements from HCjs/SCjs, which are dime a dozen, are nothing but opinions coming from individuals who have managed to climb the ladder NOT by market or elections or techinical merit, but by building "relations" and "nexuses". Take them merely as opinions, and NOT as God's words.

If above five guidelines, you will be able to understand ANY law as long as you know the techinical issues the law deals with. eg do you understand the rental contract you signed? If yes, you can understand over 99% of the laws. Spare the difficult words, they are simpler than yr rental contract.
-----
Drating a law is merely putting "what you want GoI to do in a given scenario" in words. And only difference between draft and usual post is -- in draft, one needs to ensure that he has covered almost all major possible scenarios.

So writing legislation draft is trivialer than 10th std maths, except intellectual property matters. One does need some technical information on what a specific law deals with. eg if you want to write laws wrt construction of multi story buildings, you need to talk to someone who has background in it. Or, one can write a law which circumvents the technical details by spelling out titles of experts who will be authorized to take decision on those technical matters. But once the technical matter is understood or clearly circumvented, draft writing is trivial than 10th std maths.

Lets say some good MLA is reading this thread. Now ONLY thing an MLA can do is to enact the draft of a legislation. So unless he see the draft of the legislations in this thread, he wont be able to help AP using this thread. So if we want this thread to become useful to an MLA who wants to help AP, we must provide drafts of the legislations that that MLA may pass in Assembly.

Likewise lets say some good CM is reading this thread or any other thread. Now ONLY thing a CM can issue is enact Executive Notifcation and expel/appoint officers. The latter is spot job - not any long term solution. So unless that CM sees the draft of the Executive Notifications, he wont be able to help people of his State. So if we want this thread to become useful to an CM who wants to help people in India, we must provide drafts of the Executive Notifcations that that CM can enact. And same goes for PM.

So lets help good MLA, MP, CM, PM etc by putting the DRAFTS of the legislations and Executive Notifications that can help India.
-----
One demand I ask EVERY citizen to make to every Party is : [b[pls show the DRAFTS of the laws you would pass to reduce problems like poverty, corruption etc[/b]. If a Party or a candidate says : first campaign for us or elect us, and we will show you the drafts after we get elected, such Party is not worth the salt.

eg Consider you have 1000 sqm plot. Say you want bungalow on it. Say you go to a civil engineer or an architect. He promises grand things such good bedrooms, drawing rooms, balconies etc. Next tou ask him to give rough price estimates and design. Say his reply is "Man, dont worry about design and details. Just give me five year non revocable power of attorney and at the end of five years, you will have the house you want". I dont think you will give him non revocable power of attorney just because he is a nice guy.

Same way, we citizens and activists should ask for the DRAFTS. Even if we dont understand the draft, we should ask for it to ensure that he has drafts (plan). If he did not make draft till now, chances that he will make drafts after he is elected are next to zero.
----
In absence of well drafted unambiguous laws, the high-middle-low level neta-babu-judges can interpret the laws the way they like or worse take advantage of vacuum that absence of laws create. The written law will favor the commons, and when it does not, it exposes the law makers clearly. In latter case, it favors the pro-common activists as they can give a clear proof that elitemen are robbing the commons using such laws.
----
Consider two opposite scenario

1. Say small number of people, 1 to n draft laws. But before enacting the law, they take explicit approval of commons.

2. Say a large number of people N, N >> n, draft laws. But this N is still 0.01% of the society. And after drafting, these 0.1% of people impose the law on commons without any approval from commons.

When Virgina Constitution was written in 1775, Jefferson demanded a referendum before enacting that Constitution. But his letter written from Washington reached 10 days after Constitution was already enacted. So his demand was not met. But his campaign that States should have referendum before Constitution comes into force had impact. Some four 4 states went from referendum before imposition of Constitution. And in one of the states, the voters rejected the proposed Constitution by 4:1 votes and so the Constitution had to be redrafted. Back then, Federal Govt was seen as UN like consortium and so Founding Fathers of US did not demand referendum to implement that.

In contrast, look at Nehru et al. Endless consultations with rich and powerful were held before our Magnum Opus Constitution was drafted. But Nehru refused to have referendum provision anywhere in Constitution. Nor did Nehru wasted time in seeking approval of us commons before imposing the Magnum Opus. And first thing he did after imposing Constitution was canceling JurySys, a tool by which citizens can express protest against Govt as well as laws in the Courts. So much for his democratic mindset.

My point is : One can be oligarchic or dictatorial while drafting, but democratic in enacting laws. While one can be democratic in a small circle in making drafts, but dictatorial in enacting laws.

IMO, we should focus on former ONLY. How does it matter whether drafts are written by 1 person of 100 persons? Drafts are like modern software - 1% inspiration, 99% perspiration and 1% originality and
99% copy. The laws always run into 1000s and 1000s of pages, and so it clear ab-initio that one person cannot write all this pages and will have delegated it. The important thing is whether laws were approved by commons before they were imposed, and did commons have ways to reject the laws if they later found that laws were created to serve only the rich and not the commons.
----
A draftless leader is more likely to have dictatorial mindset than a leader with drafts. Because when a leader gives drafts before coming into power, he is giving full opportunity to commons to agree, disagree and also force leaders to make changes which majority wants. The draftless leader is avoiding drafts with a purpose -- he does not want majority to give an option to have control over laws. The draftless leader after power will have option of making any draft he wants, or he can even default on promise to make that law. The very act of giving draft BEFORE coming into power shows that the leader is more democratic than a draftless leader, who does not want commons to have any say on the drafts. A draftless leader is a dictator out of power, but wants to get into power via public support. So he gives eloberate slogans, world views and rosy pictures to attract masses and once they vote him into power, he wants to act in his own way without constraints. This is the ONLY reason why he evades giving drafts, as drafts would deny him freedom to act in his own way once he comes into power.
-----
The draft generally deals with one item at a time. eg consider "Draft for Recall of PM". This draft will deal with very very few specific points. Where as ideology deals with too many things. Ideologies are vague and always subject to interpretation. Where as well written drafts, which clearly spell out discretionary powers, are seldom vague.
---
The Indian elitemen give zero value to consensus. The phrase "pls dont hurry, lets wait for consensus" is used ONLY when commons are demanding a law that elitemen do not want. Otherwise,when elitemen want a law, they bulldoze it even against wish and will of commons, and dont give a damn about consensus. eg consider SEZ law or law of giving product patents to medicine. No MP or intellectual (hires of elitemen) even asked for consensus - they just bulldozed these laws.
-----
JLN refused to introduce referendum procedure in Indian Constitution because he believed in "rule by elitemen" and did not want a system where will of commons can overrule wish of elitemen. And the commons could not force JLN to put referendum procedure, as commons had no weapons to force JLN to do so. And now since commons in India dont have any ways to change laws, the elitemen take commons for a ride, and keep making laws that would fleece commons and enrich the elitemen. So commons run towards naxals, missionaries etc for protection, food, cloth, medicine and English education, and the nation is seeing endless stream of Lalgadhs. The trendline is not good.

-------------

Many confuse small size with democracy. A common argument given is that "See, vibrant democracy was possible in Athens because it was small in size". Well, it was because of democracy that such a small sized Athens became so strong that it could rule over a large area and left an impact that we remember even today. Athens had only 60000 adult males. To that, add 60000 females and some 120,000 children. So free population was 240,000. Such tiny population had over 300,000 slaves in Athens and had dominated territories around Athens which would be 10-20 times its population and size. Essentially, the democracy they followed made them so strong that they could enslave so many people and dominate so many others. So instead of saying that "democracy is possible only in small region/population", a more accurate statement would be "democracy makes small population so powerful that it can dominate over much larger groups".

As population/size increases , one only needs to change the procedure code so that larger population can participate. Thats about it. Otherwise size and democracy had nothing in common or nothing against.

---

In a "well designed" administrative system, the inefficiency is any will not be proportional to N, but will be proportional to log(N). And the increase in size is often accompanied with vast improvement in technology by which citizens can supervise the officers, provided laws to supervise those officers exist. The problem today is absence of these laws, not size


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group