Swaraj is great, but can AAP make Delhi a village republic?

One Gandhian maxim that Arvind Kejriwal swears by is "Swaraj" or "self-rule"; but has he taken it to a level where it not only doesn't make sense any more, but also has begun to erode his reputation?

Or is it the unique status of Delhi, which is both a state and the administrative capital of a nation, that makes the demand for complete self-governance appear anarchist and hardline?

Arvind Kejriwal should learn from seasoned politicians such as Jayalalithaa in Tamil Nadu. PTI

Reporters had seen bundles of Kejriwal's book on "Swaraj" being taken into Delhi's Constitution Club hall where his legislators were in a quick training after the elections. Going by the dogmatic conduct of his cabinet and core group of supporters, it looks as if the AAP has been able to only doctrinate them, but not teach them the nuances and applicability.

Indian constitution paves the way for self-governance through its Directive Principles and the 73rd and 74 amendments, but as the sixth report of the Union Government's Administrative Reforms Commission notes, "local democracy is sometimes treated as synonymous with 'decentralisation', but the two are in fact quite distinct."

Is this where Kejriwal is getting it all wrong?

Given Delhi's complex duality — as a city state and as the administrative capital of India — if one lacks tact and clarity, the entitlement to local-governance will certainly come into conflict with the authority of the national government. And the conflict can be bad, when there are political gains for the national government. The demand that Delhi police should be with the Kejriwal government is legitimate because policing is a state subject every where else, but seeking to achieve it the way the AAP did is tricky and can put off people.

Unless one steps back and sees the duality of Delhi and negotiates, even existing freedom of self-governance can be in jeopardy. This is in fact a problem in the overall process of decentralisation in the country — the lack of certain crucial powers. In Gandhi, Freedom and Self, Bunker Roy is quoted as saying that the "gram sabhas" which were strengthened after the constitutional amendments lacked the power to replace corrupt and incompetent panchayat officials. It has legislature, judiciary and executive powers, but not magistracy powers.

Kejriwal's situation is something similar. He has no control over the most important responsibility of his state, namely law and order because Delhi police doesn't need to listen to him or his officers.
But, can anarchy on the streets be an answer to resolve this contradiction? Most certainly not.

Kejriwal should learn from seasoned politicians such as Jayalalithaa in Tamil Nadu. She systematically took on the Centre within the framework of the Constitution on issues that are important for the state. She passed three resolutions in the assembly against the Centre on the Sri Lankan Tamil issue and always made a political plank out of it. Today, the Congress is an electoral untouchable in the state because it didn't have the wisdom to read the political message in her protestations.

Kejriwal should certainly raise the heckles, but within the assembly and in whichever forums available. Politically, he should prompt the people of Delhi demand for "Poorna Swaraj" or complete self-governance, which should obviously include law and order.

Meanwhile, he should also realise that this "Swaraj" is not a right to indulge in nonsense such as profiling people, including foreign nationals, because it impinges on the responsibility of the Indian Republic to its citizens and other nations.

Self-governance is both a philosophy and process. Getting the philosophy right is crucial, but not without the processes — skills and tools — that make it work. Unfortunately, Delhi is not a village republic as envisaged by Mahatma Gandhi's idea of "Swaraj" and it can behave like one only by carefully exercised responsibility.