Deliberative Democracy
It originated from the ideas of Aristotle and his notions of politics. However, Joseph M. Bessette was the first thinker to put all the links together in his 1980 work, Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government. It considered every pros and cons, and every possible application of this form of democracy. Being the most logical one, this theory lacked behind because it's central idea were moral and was based on public welfare. It is a proven fact that as much as the indulgence of minds are there, the results is as rational in nature. More people can think in more possible ways which allows the government to follow the majority rule. As we see in India, that the government works in a partly deliberative manners. In India, all it's three bodies of government has its power limited by the constitution which allows this thing to happen.
The laws which states the function and power of legislature, executive and judiciary doesn't allow the discussion to happen in a deliberative manner. For example, Rajya Sabha is the upper house in the legislative framework, but it doesn't have any say in the money bill of India. Only the lower house can amend such bill. Irrespective of the other bill that can originate in legislature, where any house can make amendment in the bill until it becomes an act. This proves that even the world's largest democracy does not believe in complete deliberative decision-making. In such state, deliberative democracy is said to be in a kind of amalgam of representative democracy and disputes at the same time. Whereas, it is the only tolerant system which is open to disputes. People has their say in the law making of the land. The more is the better is the real idea behind the doctrine of democracy.
The legitimacy of the democratic decision should be based on the authentic deliberation and not entirely on preference of a particular support group or party. Any state in its true context is not said to be deliberative if it's decision making body is persuaded by a certain similar idea, power is obtained to a decision-maker through economic wealth and from the support of a particular majority of support groups. If the decision making is in the hand of such group , then there will be no legitimate decision made which will be supported by the state as a whole. Deliberative democracy can be practiced by both representative democracies and states with direct democracy. The true picture of a deliberative government is possible there.
Now the question arises of elitist deliberative democracy, where the decision making elite bodies are the one which is responsible for making and enforcing laws. Such elite bodies may be a group of elected member, a legislature or a court. Like in a populist deliberative democracy, principles of deliberative democracy apply to that group of lay(common) citizens who are empowered to make decisions. In a parallel universe I believe that every time when a law is to be enforced, there should be a small popular voting panel present. It's work is to lay an opinion on the basis of the legality of the bill. They should be sound and expert in their job. Let me know you ideas about this in comments. Thank you for reading and stay tuned....
BY- Baibhav Ranjan | BA, UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
Comments
Post a Comment
THANK YOU FOR YOUR RESPONSE I WAS PLEASED TO ENTERTAIN YOU!