3 More on TCP – the proposed three lined GN

(A detailed version of this chapter in notes #301.003 on http://facebook.com/mehtarahulc )

Download this chapter 3 : http://www.righttorecall.info/301.pdf

3.1 Later additions to TCP GN to make it as secure as banking

Within 3 months after TCP Gazette Notification is issued, following clauses can be added to GN. These features are to reduce “bogus voting” and also to counter the argument that “there will be bogus voting and so this procedure must never ever exist”

1. A person will be able to register Yes-No by ATM – he has to register his ATM card in Voter List Dept in Collector’s office and after verification, he will be able to register YES-NO via ATM

2. A person will be able to register Yes-No by SMS– he has to register his mobile phone number in the Voter List Dept in Collector’s office and after verification, he will be able to register YES-NO via SMS

3. The citizen’s finger print will be in computer so that computer can verify the voter using finger-print identification.

4. A camera will be connected to Patwari’s computer so that it will scan the picture of the citizen and finger print and store it as well as put it on the receipt of his Yes-No. This way a person is registering too many Yes-No, it would become possible to track and arrest him.

5. The citizen will be given a passbook that will have list of all Yes-No he has registered. So if anyone else has registered Yes-No by impostering him, he will come to know about it

6. Every citizen will get a statement every month showing list of Yes-No he registered in past six months. So if any imposter has registered Yes/No, he will come to know about it

7. If the citizen wishes, he can register his mobile phone number and he will get SMS when he registers Yes-No. So if anyone has registered Yes-No by impostering him, he will come to know about it immediately.

8. If the citizen wishes, he can register his email address and he will get email when he registers Yes/No. So if anyone has registered Yes-No by impostering him, he will come to know about it immediately.

This will make Yes-No registration more secure than banking. With these safe-guards, bogus voter will be caught by 5th or 6th try and this will reduce the number of bogus filers. Now “1% of Yes-No may be bogus and so all 75 cr voters must not be allowed to register Yes-No” is a frivolous argument.

3.2 Will citizens be filing Yes-No 1000s of times?

The proposed TCP Gazette Notification does not require or even expect citizens to register Yes-No on every affidavit or every proposed law-draft? Nor does it mean that MPs , MLAs cannot make any more laws — they may as they do now. The TCP-GN only means that if a citizen wants to register Yes/No on some of the laws on Govt website , Govt shall not block him and Govt shall register his Yes-No on the Govt website. Now out of 1000s of laws we have, not all will register Yes-No on all laws. But x% may register Yes-No on some 100-200 laws, and x% may be very high for laws such as DVA, 498A etc. This x% YESes or NOs can create a powerful movement for/against that law-draft.

The TCP-GN simply creates an additional option. The citizens may depend on MLAs, MPs for most laws and demand to cancel the laws. But there are times when MPs, MLAs refuse to listen. eg Majority of citizens want 498A and DVA to be canceled, but MPs, MLAs insist on keeping this law-draft as this law-draft fetches huge bribes to policemen (and MLAs, MPs get part of these bribes via the IPS). Likewise, almost all commons I met agree that interviews during recruitments of judges, professors, policemen, IIMs students etc should be banned but all MPs, MLAs and intellectuals insist on laws that promote interviews. They support interviews because it enables them to collect bribes, put their relatives and filter out meritorious but “ideologically inconvenient” people. These are the times when if citizens have procedure to register YES/NO on laws, they may be able to use it.

3.3 TCP and caste-based Reservation in jobs

I have been campaigning this proposal, that allow citizens to write on Govt website, for a few years. One valid question I get from many upper caste youth is : wont TCP result into increase in reservation? Wont SC, ST and OBCs demand more reservation using this GN? The answer is : NO. In fact, it will reduce the reservation, as the poor Dalits, the poor STs and the poor OBCs will support the law-draft “Economic Choice vs. Reservation” that I have proposed in the chapter “RRP stand on Reservation issue”. As per the law-draft, any Dalit, ST, OBC will have option to get Rs 600\year instead of reservation. So if say 80% SC, ST and OBC opt for economic choice, then total reservation will decrease from 50% to 10%. The law-draft proposed in that chapter will get support from over 80% of Dalits, STs and OBCs who are poor and cant even reach class-12. And this will reduce total caste based reservation. So if one is worried that TCP will increase the reservation, he is mistaken. Thus, TCP will lead to “Economic Choice vs. Reservation” which will reduce reservation.

3.4 Wont the rich be able to buy out citizens?

One question I often face is : wont the rich be able to buy out the citizens? Answer is NO. Consider an example. Say I propose an GN – Abolish SEZ Act 2005.

Say there are 72 cr voters in India. So for the proposed GN to succeed, it would need YES from about 37 cr citizen-voters. Obviously, pro-SEZ elitemen might decide to spend 100s of crores of rupees to ensure that the proposal does not get 37 cr YESes. Will their money help?

1. Now if proposal fails to reach the ears of 38 cr citizens, it failed but NOT because of money of pro-SEZ elitemen.

2. If the proposal reached 10s of crores of voters and the refused to register YES, then the failure was not due to money of pro-SEZ elitemen.

3. Say some proposal did reach ears of 50 cr to 70 cr voters. Say some 45 cr voters decided to register YES i.e. cancel SEZ Act 2005.

4. Now will it be possible for pro-SEZ elitemen to pay say Rs 50 or Rs 1000 or anything so that some 4 cr voters do not register YES?

Lets say that pro-SEZ elitemen see that some 40 cr citizens are likely to register YES on “abolish SEZ” proposal. Say elitemen decide to bribe out say 5 crore voters and ask them not to register YES. Say they offer Rs 100 per voter. If the do, every citizen would demand Rs 100 and so elitemen will have to give Rs 100 to all 75 cr citizens and so they will end up spending Rs 7200 cr. But will that be end of the story? No. Say elitemen pay Rs 7200 cr and manage to stop commons from registering YES on the proposal. Then all I need to do is to ask one of my friends to submit same “abolish SEZ Act 2005” proposal with a few words different,. Now thats a different proposal. So voters will ask elitemen again to cough up Rs 100 or they would threaten to register YES on this new proposal. After all, it is a different proposal – the money paid for the previous proposal in past doesn’t count. So elitemen will have to cough up another Rs 7200 cr again. If that also happens, I can again ask my another friend to submit a third proposal with few words different. Now either citizens will register YES on that third proposal or demand another Rs 100 from pro-SEZ elitemen. Within months, elitemen would run out their all their generations of savings and assets. All wealth of elitemen in India add to no more than Rs 100,00,000 crores. If they decide to stall a pro-common anti-elitemen proposal using Rs 100 per voter, the cost would be Rs 7200 cr per such proposal. And by filing 2000 such proposals within 6 months, which would cost me and my friend only Rs 20000/- all the money of elitemen would evaporate within 6-12 months. And the elitemen are rational — they would not waste their money like this and attain nothing. IOW, TCP will ensure that bribe given to citizen is burning away money and results into no gains. So making claims that TCP is something that elitemen can buy away only shows that person is hopelessly unaware of real life calculation. TCP is immune to money power as it gives option to citizens to file same proposal again and again and again and thus collect money again and again and again. This is simply unviable.

3.5 Why do all eminent intellectuals oppose this TCP GN I demand?

This GN I demand does not require allocation of hundreds of crores of rupees, does not require allocation of 1000s of staff, does not require 1000s of buildings or roads. And as per our Constitution as interpreted by the Citizens, PM\CM do not need approval of MPs\MLAs to enact this change. Yet each and every eminent intellectual is hostile to this proposed Gazette Notification. All parties’ leaders have hated this proposal and their CMs and PM have sworn not to print this TCP GN we demand. All eminent intellectuals of India have opposed this TCP-GN and have asked CMs and PM not print this TCP GN. Why? Pls ask them.

3.6 How powerful is TCP —- the RRP claim

A pro-common change starts not just when crores of citizens have agreed, but when crores of citizens have agreed and crores of citizens know that crores of citizens have agreed. Let me repeat this sentence, as the sentence covers theme of all major changes that citizens brought in past 3000 years.

A pro-common change starts not just when crores of citizens have agreed, but when crores of citizens have agreed and crores of citizens know that crores of citizens have agreed.

The “crores of citizens know that crores of citizens have agreed” is what I call as “the Zero of Political Arithmetic”. That’s where and when the pro-common change begins. The intellectuals and mediamen always try to convince each of the common that he is all alone and rest of the crores of commons are unaware. TCP not only enables citizen to file YES/NO on a proposed change, but if crores of citizens have agreed for a change, then all crores of citizens come to know that crores of citizens do want this change. It does not allow media-owners to create an image that “people don’t care” on an issue. TCP reduces the power of media-owners in twisting images on priorities of the crores of citizens. TCP is central to our RRP’s political movement to improve the Indian administration. And our RRP-claim is : My TCP claim : Once citizens manage to force PM to put TCP in the Gazette Notification, poverty will vanish in 4 months, MNC domination will reduce in 4 months, and corruption in India’s police, courts and education will become near zero in 4 month, and within 10 years, India will be at par with West in terms of technology, economy and weapon manufacturing.

I would repeat my claim in a box :

My RRP claim : Once citizens manage to force PM to put TCP in the Gazette Notification, poverty will vanish in 4 months, MNC domination will reduce in 4 months, and corruption in India’s police, courts and education will become near zero in 4 month, and within 10 years, India will be at par with West in terms of technology, economy and weapon manufacturing.

3.7 Why do I demand a tiny change like TCP as first step?

My eventual goals are giving mine royalties to citizens, giving procedure to replace SCjs to citizens and so forth. But my first demand is tiny — letting us commons register YES/NO and that too the YES/NO counts have no legal weight. So while there are other administrative changes in our agenda, the first change I propose is tiny. Why do I ask citizens to ask for such a tiny change ?

Because if we citizens ask for a large change, we would end up giving years of time to CMs, PM and intellectuals. If the commons ask for large change, like employment or complete eradication of poverty or so forth, then that would automatically give the neta an excuse to ask for months and years of time. In this long years, CMs, intellectuals would do nothing and we would lose that long time. Also, when a leader denies a small change, it is easy for activists to mobilize movement against him. By asking leaders not for a big change, but for small change, and when the leader/intellectuals refuse to implement that small change, it would become possible for commons and pro-commons to convince the selfless activists that leaders, elitemen and intellectuals are corrupt.

3.8 Our request to all non-80G-activists and citizens

We request all non-80G-activists and citizens to taken following steps

1. please take time to read every word of the TCP draft I have proposed

2. if you hate TCP, then bye-bye, I have nothing for you – all my proposals are based on TCP.

3. if you like TCP draft, then.

° if you are BJP supporter then I request you to ask BJP CMs to print TCP draft in Gazette

° if you are Congress supporter then I request you to ask Congress PM\CMs to print TCP-draft

° if you are CPM supporter then I request you to ask CPM CMs to print TCP-draft in Gazette

° if you are BSP then I request you to ask BSP CMs to print TCP-draft in Gazette

° etc etc

4. if you like TCP draft, then pls ask Anna Hazare to print TCP clauses in the Jan Lokpal draft

5. if they all refuse to print TCP, then I request to you to raise mass movement on your own to force PM\CMs to print TCP-draft in the Gazette.

3.9 Stand of politicians and activist-leaders on TCP

All MPs in Congress, BJP, CPM, CPI have opposed TCP. Even opposition MPs such as Subramanian Swamy has opposed TCP. These politicians oppose TCP because these politicians depend heavily on MNC-owners and Missionaries for media support i.e. MNC-owners and Missionaries pay mediamen to support these leaders. The MNC-owners and Missionaries do not want TCP in India, and so these leaders oppose TCP.

The activist leader such as The Anna has opposed the proposal to print TCP clauses in the Janlokpal draft. Each of the Chhote Anne have also opposed TCP clauses. They also ask activist to oppose TCP. They oppose TCP because they heavily depend on MNC-owners and Missionaries for media coverage. The MNC-owners and Missionaries are paying TV-channel-owners to cover them. And they all know

All in all, all MPs, MLAs, intellectuals and activist leaders oppose RTR because they rightly fear that elitemen and Missionaries will stop supporting them if they were to support RTR.

3.10 How can YOU help in bringing TCP draft in India’s Gazette?

Please read chap-13 of this book http://rahulmehta.com/301.htm . It has several steps where-in you can spend 6 hours a week and help to bring TCP drafts in Gazette in India. The steps involve distributing pamphlets, informing citizens on motives of leaders who oppose TCP, giving newspaper ads, contesting elections on RTR plank etc.

Review Questions

1. How much is the fee proposed by RRP for registration of YES/NO in TCP?

2. What is the cost in your opinion if 75 crore citizens register their Yes-No over ATM? Via SMS

3. In TCP, can citizen register YES/NO on a law-draft demanded by a citizen?

4. Say PM enacts Lets PM signs first GN we demand. Say out of 75cr registered voters, say 40 cr voters register NO on IPC 498A. Will the law-draft automatically get canceled as per first GN?

5. Suppose 35 cr citizens register NO on a law-draft. What is the monetary expense incurred by them?

6. Under GN we demand, will a citizen be able to register YES/NO on PILs filed and register YES/NO on Constitutional validity of SCjs’ judgments?

7. Say on an average, a citizen registers YES/NO on 100 laws he likes/dislikes. What is the % of GDP is used away? Approximately, how many clerks will be required to meet this load?

8. Say a proposed GN is approved by say 51% of citizens. Is it legally must that PM has to print it? Suppose a citizen submits a proposed GN of 15 pages. What will be the registration charge?

9. Support 40 cr approve a GN. What would be cost incurred?

Exercises

1. Please translate this chapter into your native language

2. Please gather information on level of education in people in Switzerland, US etc when they started using referendum society.

3. How many persons were imprisoned under section 498A in past 5 years? As per your estimate, how much was the time, money they had to spend? As per your estimate, how much money did lawyers and policemen would have made from these cases? How much of the money policemen made would have gone to Ministers, MLAs and MPs?

4. Would you vote for an MLA, MP candidate who expressly says that he will NOT allow citizens to register YES/NO on laws?

5. Please call CMs, PM of Party you support, and obtain explanations on why they are opposing us commons’ demands that we commons be allowed to register YES/NO on laws they enact.

6. Why do we at MRCM propose to make YES/NO counts non-binding on PM?

7. Why do both the Secular and Hinduvaadi intellectuals oppose the second GN MRCM Group is demanding?

8. If you support the MRCM’s first two GNs, then we request you to write names of 10 eminent intellectuals who know, and meet/call and find out why they oppose these two proposed GNs.

9. Please call or contact CMs, PM of Party you support, and obtain explanation why they are ALL hostile to Second MRCM Group demand.

Advertisements

About RTR

3 line law can reduce corruption and bring peoples to power

One response to “3 More on TCP – the proposed three lined GN

  1. Pingback: Three Line Law Can Reduce Corruption And Let Citizens Comes To Power « Three Line Law Can Make "Citizens Are Supreme" For Ever

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: