As a starter, how many people have fully read the Constitution? You can 'google' it or buy a book in one of the book stores to read. Well, how many politicians sitting inside the Parliament have read it? What about keeping an examination for each politician on Constitution and all its 90 odd amendments so far, before they enter Parliament? If I say this, all the parliamentarians from inside the Parliament and some 'interested' media people will jump at me and say that I am suggesting something that is not provided in the Constitution, they will say that I am undermining democracy by asking them to pass an exam to enter Parliament, just the way they accused Team Anna with hijacking the Parliament (before finally bowing to his and the People's wishes)! They will go a step further and say that it is their (politicians) right to go to Parliament, no matter if some of them are illiterate, criminal, thugs or thieves and whether or not they know and understand the Articles and various provisions of The Constitution of India fully.

When I read and studied Constitution of India first time, for my exams, was in 1988. What I knew then, and was reminded recently, that it took about 2-3 years (1947 to 1949, till it was accepted on 26 January 1950) for the forefathers of the country to draft it. Well they must have tried to consider and deliberate on virtually every possible thing possible at that time, and hopefully they would have tried to check other advanced countries for their Constitutional framework too. I used the words 'at that time' intentionally, since, like all books written or actions made at a given time does not have the advantage of looking into the future. Like all the holy books, the Bible, the Quran, the Bhagavadgita and so on. The subsequent developments cannot be possibly anticipated and covered, though certain things are anticipated (like basic instincts and sins of people!) but still leave out a lot of important things - take for example, the thought that the world was flat that existed at the time of writing or compiling these holy books and the conflict that took place later on when scientists proved otherwise!

Exactly like that, our forefathers when they drafted and compiled the Constitution of India, they possibly tried as many things as possible, but being human, it was impossible for them to cover everything and one of them was today's corrupt practices perpetrated by different segments of our Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic of India - namely, the executive and the judiciary, as has been proven in several cases of graft though resulting in very few arrests, impeachments and suspensions.

Our forefathers, having seen a reasonably clean (though ruthlessly discriminatory against Indians) governance of the British, must have never imagined the current pass to which the country has come to. So, obviously, they did not make any exceptions to the powers of the parliamentarians in making laws. They provided some powers to the judiciary, yet the judiciary is certainly weak, even when it is crystal clear that the legislature is required to make laws for which they have a conflict of interest like making anti corruption laws. Just on the contrary, imagine making a law that will benefit them - like increase in their salaries, increase in the MPs constituency allowance etc - such laws are passed without any problems.

Now I come to the three key parts of this blog. 1. Conflict of Interest 2. Powers of Parliament 3. Duty of Parliamentarians towards People and the country. I will not dwell on these separately, but intermittently in the next paragraphs.

Let me make it very clear at the outset as a learned citizen of this country, I fully agree with, and abide by, the strength of the Constitution and the power of the Parliament to make laws. But when the parliamentarians and certain sections of the media feigning ignorance, speak about such powers, I am saddened that they ignore another, but more important, aspect of the same Constitution, which is the RIGHTS of the PEOPLE and the DUTIES they entrust to their representatives or the parliamentarians who are part of the Executive to rule and govern the country. These people totally forget where and how the Constitution actually starts! Just to remind them, or to educate them, I would like to quote: "We the People of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into...". Remember, it is the People of India who have given the various powers and rights under the Constitution to the elected representatives and such powers have not come from thin air. So, when the politicians and other vested interests speak about their powers, it is better if they remember, for their own good, that it is the People of India who are supreme, who give these powers. Without the People, parliamentarians wont be sent to the Parliament! Simple. Both theoretically and constitutionally, the power of People is greater than that of the parliamentarians, or the council of ministers. If not, then we can very well abolish the elections every 5 years! 

Another element to be considered here is the duty of the MPs or the Union or the State as they are referred in several parts of the Constitution. I can literally prove several different ways in which our supreme parliament has not met the directive principles or violated the provisions of the Constitution. How many of the politicians' companies employ children below 14 years of age or how many such children were deprived of basic education? The Constitution stated that the right to education for children below 14 years should be framed within 10 years of the date of the Constitution - didnt it take around 60 years to do so for our politicians (as our PM announced just last year?) and twice this Article 45 was amended in 1976 and 2002?

How seriously have the politicians tried to implement appropriate measures to fulfill the Directive Principles (duties of the State towards good governance of the country) - say Article 38 (ensuring welfare of people), Article 39 (Proper distribution of material resources of the community, operation of the economic system, preventing concentration of wealth etc), have they successfully implement prohibition (of alcohol) as stated in Article 47? I can list many more where our 'power hungry' parliamentarians have failed.

In all, it is baffling for every citizen of this country, referred to as the PEOPLE in the first line of the Constitution, that the MPs act in such a brazen manner, trying to tightly hold on to their powers without actually giving any relevance to their DUTIES towards the PEOPLE. This is where the issue of Conflict of Interest comes into being. While at every sneeze of a common man (sorry for the exaggeration), the Parliament brings in laws to curtail freedom of people (which still dont achieve the directive principles which is a different issue), they take so long to bring laws to govern their own actions or abuse thereof.

So, at the end of it all, the parliamentarians have to admit that, while they have been given the powers to govern by the PEOPLE, the People are given importance and are heard, whenever the parliamentarians prove that they have failed to enact any appropriate laws as required by the Constitution. Especially in matters where there is a clear conflict of interest, as in the case of a strong Lokpal and Lokayuktas in the states which they failed for over 60 years, or at least for 42 years since the first attempt was made in 1968. When as many as 8 attempts have failed by such 'powerful' politicians, what the People should do? Wait and watch a horror movie and go back home with content?

If despite such failure, motivated by protecting their own interest, the politicians still say that the parliament's powers are supreme and People shall not have any voice or People cannot impose their ways and Bills on the Parliament, I am sorry, I may have actually read some other document, not the Constitution of India.