India's voters go to the polls in five phases from 16 April to 13 May to elect 543 Members of Parliament. The results will be announced on 16 May.
The most striking feature about India's elections is the sheer scale of the exercise. Since 1952 India has been the most populous democracy in the world. At 714 million (an increase of 43 million since the last election!), the Indian electorate is larger than the entire population of any country in the world save China. It is also more than double the total US population, the second-largest democracy in the world. The electorate has more than quadrupled since 1952; the number of polling stations is 828,000; there will 1.1 million electronic voting machines staffed by four million election personnel; and security will be overseen by two million police officers. For the first time they fear terrorist attacks, on the model of Mumbai last November, to try to disrupt the polling.
To hold free and peaceful elections on such a scale is no mean feat anywhere; it is a wonder in a developing country. An independent Election Commission has the responsibility for delimiting over 3500 federal and provincial constituencies, organising and conducting elections, registering eligible voters, recognising political parties and their election symbols, and establishing procedures for the nomination of candidates.
Its constitutional status elevates its importance and stature. The Chief Election Commissioner is given security of tenure on par with Supreme Court judges. Federal and state governments are obliged to make available to the commission such staff as may be necessary for the discharge of its functions.
Ceilings on campaign expenses are so absurdly low that the lubricant of elections is ''black money''. Fraudulent practices are not unknown, but do not affect the overall outcomes of election results. ''Booth-capturing'' is particularly notorious in my home state, Bihar: mercenary thugs are available to the highest bidder for forcible capture of election booths, at the point of a gun if need be. Ballot boxes are then stuffed in favour of the paymaster candidate. Security guards are either bribed into active connivance or intimidated into passive acquiescence.
Gradually the professional thugs have begun to contest elections themselves instead of hiring out their talents to others. There has therefore been a steady criminalisation of politics to match the earlier politicisation of crime. Expect a couple of hundred people to be killed in election-related violence; most will be in Bihar. In the outgoing Parliament, 125 MPs 23 per cent of the total faced and are still facing criminal charges, including murder and rape. Far from being embarrassed, parties are becoming increasingly brazen and blase{aac} about fielding tainted candidates.
A second notable feature of Indian elections is the length of time for which they have been held. This is India's 15th general election. With the addition of state elections since 1952, the total represents a stupendous laboratory for psephologists. Democratic institutions enjoy high acceptability and legitimacy.
A third distinguishing feature about India as a Third World democracy is that the choice and turnover of political leadership has been determined at the ballot box rather than by bullets. The culture and practice of alternating governments is an essential element in the establishment of democratic contestation. Toleration by government of dissent and opposition is necessary but not sufficient. An additional requirement is acceptance of the opposition becoming government as per voters' preferences.
India's political stability has been exceptional in the Third World; its soldiers have not come riding on to the political stage, its former leaders have not been executed, imprisoned or exiled. Think of Bangladesh, Nepal, Afghanistan and Pakistan just in its immediate neighbourhood to appreciate the magnitude of India's exemplary achievement. After almost six decades of competitive electoral politics, India has had alternation of governments in all the states as well as in New Delhi.
Fourth, elections have been conducted on the basis of universal adult franchise from the start. Unlike most Western democracies, where voting rights were extended to women after protracted debate and agitation, they were granted to all women as well all men in India from the start.
Fifth, India's democracy is caught in a potentially dangerous dynastic grip. The Congress Party has long been in the hands of the Nehru-Gandhi family. Manmohan Singh was chosen as party leader by Italian-born Sonia Gandhi, daughter-in-law of former prime minister Indira Gandhi, herself the daughter of founding prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru. In 2004, Sonia Gandhi passed over the chance to become PM herself for fear of setting off widespread agitation against a foreigner ruling the country. Instead, she wields power behind the throne and her son Rahul is a party general secretary. One of the BJP's slogans is that ''The PM presides, Sonia decides''. It's indeed disconcerting to hear the urbane, learned and dignified Singh lapse into the occasional note of sycophancy towards the family.
The habit of politics as a family business seems to have caught on, to the detriment of Indian democracy. In the outgoing lower house, 56 per cent of the MPs under 40 had no obvious credential other than family connections.
Sixth, Indians revel in the excitement of elections. It is a huge tamasha (carnival) on a vast stage. The campaigns are colourful affairs, the political debate is engaged in passionately by millions of people and the results are awaited and analysed with intense interest. Increasing use is made of electronic technology.
At the same time, the persistence of widespread illiteracy gives extra importance to visual symbols differentiating the parties. At a superficial level, politics in India is concerned with symbols more than issues. Parties contest elections on the basis of slogans instead of argument over ideology or policy. The people know that the politicians are engaged in a battle over power as an end in itself or as a means to money. All parties make solemn promises to eradicate poverty, combat corruption and preserve the nation; all buy votes or musclemen specialising in the delivery of votes; and life returns pretty much to normal after the hullabaloo and tamasha of elections.
Finally, and most importantly, India's election outcome affects the fate of a rather large number of people. They are indeed momentous events.
In 2004, the counting of 387 million (!) votes was begun in the morning. By 10 in the evening, detailed results of 533 of the 543 seats up for grabs could be accessed on the official website of the Election Commission of India. The remaining 10 were completed the next day. The fact that the ruling party had suffered such a stunning upset only underlined the professionalism and neutrality of the commission. And their verdict, as indeed the verdict of the voters, is immediately accepted by everyone, including the defeated government, as the only conceivable resolution of the political contest.
Isn't democracy wonderful and wondrous? In the sanctity of the election booth, the voters put to the sword all settled wisdom of the pollsters and the pundits. What will we see this time round? Watch this space.
Ramesh Thakur, founding director of the Balsillie School of International Affairs in Waterloo, Canada, is the author of The Government and Politics of India.
Email a friend