Politicization hampers the rule of law

By Afreeha Jawad

Ascending the Persian throne after King Darius died at the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC was Xerxes who shared communality with his predecessor in conquering Greece. Leading his army across Asia Minor he came to Europe over Dardanelles after a bridge was put across for the army. Watching his troops seated on a marble throne on hill top nearby, Xerxes was soon found weeping. When asked why he should cry at a time of much rejoicing he said, "Yea, for after I had reckoned up, it came to my mind to feel pity at the thought how brief was the life of man, seeing that of those multitudes not one would be alive when a hundred years have gone by".

What Xerxes saw was life's futility and what he did not see was the system's continuity in the absence of these men. "Men may come and men may go but the system goes on forever."

Xerxes reckoning is to be located in a larger context in terms of core values - the absence of which leads to an ailing system. The rule of low is all about sticking to fundamental values. Any digression from core values certainly would result in sending the entire social gamut down the precipice of disaster.

Social inequity is first one resultant effect of that digression - not of an overnight making. The second phase of social evolution following the hunting gathering stage was the period of men's entry into agriculture. Those that organised and managed the fields were those around whom power revolved that become patriarchs, rulers and kings. While they become richer, the field workers remained that way having good just enough to live. The rich believed they had a right over the poor man's labour.

Inequity continues

The same perverted system of inequity continued into the days of slave/slave owner and new employer/employee. Yet we speak of fundamental values, of human rights of social justice and what not when the balance of scales is tipped heavily in favour of only the rich, strong and powerful. Even many educated people justify this claim to inequality by citing such presence even in the animal world making one understand of a 'no difference' between man and animal despite the purpose for which he was created - arguably a theologian's concern.

What then of basic needs? Food, clothing and shelter remain far from accessible to all people while all three and even in excess are the sole privilege of only a few.

If under a class economy affluence and power was to be with the monied class, under a caste hierarchy those that remained in the top layer were men of scholarship, wisdom and learning who in India were the 'Brahmins' whose parallel in Sri Lanka are of the Govigama caste.

The Govi caste comprising farmers presumably were men of high understanding who refrained from say for instance fishing and occupation of the like and were noted for their high degree contentment - living a life of simplicity, cultivating whatever land and tending their herd of cattle. If scholarship was the deciding factor in a caste environment, to be of a higher social order, in class surroundings it is money that decides one's social placement needless to say of the farmer's discreet existence. Yet in both systems the presence of social inequity is glaring.

Indian bureaucracy

Significantly in the Indian scene one finds the Indian bureaucrats still of the Brahmin caste that keep the politicians of varied lower castes at bay. The somewhat wholesomeness in India's bureaucracy is to Brahmin credit. This fight of the upper caste comprising bureaucracy and lower caste politicians has retarded the entry of politicization into the Indian public service. This has helped mitigate the expansion of a new rich class that generally evolves into such position with political blessings. Caste thus remain the Indian social inequity factor.

Following India's independence the Brahmins saw to it that all posts at the top administrative layer came into their hands for they resented the idea of 'siring' a man of low caste someday. They were at the zenith of power under a caste system and perceived its continuation under class environs as well.

The opposite of this is class operative Bangladesh where rich are getting richer and the poor, poorer. In both instances be it the severe polarization of classes or the emergence of a middle class, politicization remains the triggering element - certainly a distant wail from social democracies where equity based policies have realised a narrowing of class differences. Social democracies repeatedly bring in social justice in the best sense of that term as the rule of law gets firmly implanted in such countries. Politicized societies remain the most dysfunctional as the rule of law over these remains a defunct element.

Non-secular state

Another instance where such rule injures the social whole in politicized societies devoid of the rule of law is the gradual intrusion of a non-secular state. One's beliefs needs find restriction within one's self and not meant to be brought into workplace arena. Political, personal, religio/cultural feelings in officialdom is a sure way of getting furtherest away from the rule of law, for its notoriety in smothering all efforts into social justice. In such instance of a breakdown in the rule of law, merit is certainly a factor to be overlooked which is why political acquaintances are much sought after, throwing principles to the winds.

Division of labour

In social surroundings with heightened frustration following no rule of law, significantly, one finds the absence of division of labour. The executive's constant interference with the public service and judiciary, overlooking such division is not in line with the rule of law.

A digression from the rule of law is also in the non-provision of basic needs which needs are met in social democracies where the economically and physically deprived get financial sponsorship.