We love Tendulkar for what he has achieved on the cricket field, but his tenure in the Rajya Sabha has been a complete waste. As is actor Rekha's.

By Ajaz Ashraf

It is possible to argue that the Congress is guilty of hypocrisy every time it bemoans the Opposition’s strategy of stalling Parliament and aborting the legislative process. Had India’s grand old party been genuinely concerned about the exalted status of Parliament, it wouldn’t have brazenly subverted Article 80, under which the President, obviously acting on the advice of the Union government, is empowered to nominate 12 members to the Rajya Sabha.

The rationale behind Article 80 was to make available to the Rajya Sabha the services of people who have distinguished themselves in avenues such as literature, science, art and social service, but who are disinclined to wade into the turbulent waters of electoral politics. It was under this provision of the Constitution that the Congress nominated batting maestro Sachin Tendulkar and yesteryears film-star Rekha, among others, to the Rajya Sabha last year.

Let us sidestep the debate on whether cricket can be categorised as art – though Tendulkar in supreme form does make batting look like a sublime artistic expression – and instead evaluate his and Rekha’s performance in their first year in the Rajya Sabha.

Tendulkar’s attendance in the Rajya Sabha has been abysmal – a mere one percent, against the average of 77 percent, according to the website of PRS Legislative Research, an independent, non-partisan organisation. This means Tendulkar signed just one percent of the times the Rajya Sabha attendance register was available for signature, in comparison to the 77 percent of times every Rajya Sabha member on an average did. Worse, Tendulkar did not sign the attendance register even once in the winter session of 2012, nor has he in the current session till 23 April 2013. With such poor attendance record, it isn’t surprising to discover that he has yet to participate in the House debate or ask a question.

No doubt, Tendulkar is among India’s most remarkable jewels. It is also said he apportions a percentage of his financial resources for charity. He does indeed deserve our gratitude and all the awards bestowed on him. Nevertheless, the Congress, weaned on the patronage system, fallaciously and shamelessly saw in Article 80 an opportunity to embrace the famous and the popular as its mascots, cynically ignoring the question of their suitability for the Rajya Sabha.

Tendulkar unsuitable for the Rajya Sabha? Don’t go hoarse screaming against this observation, for we all knew Tendulkar just wouldn’t have the time to attend the Rajya Sabha, busy as he is playing cricket through the year, around the world. It was presumably only the Congress which did not perceive the pressure and constraints on Tendulkar’s time. Would it then be wrong to conclude that the Congress is contemptuous of public institutions?

Our political class has a curious tendency to treat public institutions as their personal fiefdoms, adamantly persuading even the reluctant to accept nominations to the Rajya Sabha. Hear what the legendary singer Lata Mangesgkar had to say about her stint in the Upper House, to which the BJP-led NDA government nominated her.

Mangeshkar was quoted saying, “My tenure in the Rajya Sabha was anything but happy. I was reluctant to be inducted into Parliament. In fact, I pleaded with those who urged me into Rajya Sabha to let me off…. What did I know about politics? I’m sure Sachin knows more about politics than me.”

It is for Tendulkar to judge whether his knowledge of public life befits the Rajya Sabha, but this much can be safely said – as in cricket, so in politics, the worth of your skills can be assessed on its turf. But Tendulkar has consistently shied away from the Rajya Sabha. He, however, generously turned down the government bungalow allotted to him in Delhi. However, we don’t know whether or not he is pocketing the Rs 50,000 a month plus allowances he is entitled to as Rajya Sabha member.

Film-star Rekha is unlikely to know much about politics, judging from her public engagements. It is debatable whether she could be said to have achieved artistic excellence, as she is known more for her glamour quotient. Her attendance record in the Rajya Sabha is marginally better than Tendulkar’s – just four percent, as against his one percent. Considering her film appearances have become rare, her poor attendance makes you wonder what could account for her absence from the Rajya Sabha other than plain indifference.

The nomination of Rekha to the Rajya Sabha is so bereft of logic that it gives credence to the speculation that it was done to taunt and torment cine-star Jaya Bachchan, who is in the Upper House as a Samajwadi Party member. The rivalry between Rekha and Bachchan had spawned many headlines in the past, but at least in the Upper House the latter has established an unassailable lead. Her attendance, though lower than the average, is 57 percent; she has participated in debates 16 times, and has asked 146 questions. In a few sessions she even notched an attendance of over 90 percent.

Perhaps the fact that Bachchan is an elected member prompts her to take her Rajya Sabha duties seriously. For instance, even former cricketer Mohammed Azharuddin in the Lok Sabha has an attendance of 76 percent, and has participated in debates twice - quite surprising for a man infamous for his waffling and mumbling. His and Jaya Bachchan’s records testify that cricketers and film-stars are not innately unfit to discharge their parliamentary duties. Ultimately, it all depends on individual sensibilities and inclinations.

Again, nominated members need not have attendance above the parliamentary average to justify their presence in the Rajya Sabha. For instance, scriptwriter Javed Akhtar’s attendance record is 53 percent, but he did indeed play a stellar role in having the copyright laws amended, thereby ensuring that royalties from films are apportioned among all those responsible in its production. However, considering Akhtar was nominated in 2010, you can say he is familiar enough with the Rajya Sabha to participate more vigorously in its sessions.

Of the three other members who were nominated along with Sachin and Rekha last year, philosopher Mrinal Miri and legal-eagle K Parasaran have attendance above the average of 77 percent; the third, industrialist Anu Aga, has only 59 percent attendance and never participated in debates or asked questions, a tad baffling considering her public persona of being a conscientious person forever willing to adopt causes. In fact, she couldn’t have clocked the 59 percent had she not boasted an impressive 95 percent attendance in her debut monsoon session of 2012. Politician Mani Shankar Aiyar lags six percent behind the average, but has been a robust participant in debates.

Of the remaining nominated members, only two – HK Dua and Dr Bhalachandra Mungekar – have attendance over the average. In other words, seven out of 11 nominated members have attendance lower than the elected MPs, whom we love to deride. An above-average attendance record usually leads to greater involvement in the Rajya Sabha. For instance, journalist HK Dua, who has 89 percent attendance, including 100 percent in five different sessions, has, since his nomination in 2009, asked 63 questions, participated 20 times in debates and sponsored two private members’ bills, of which one was withdrawn last year.

As of 2 May 2013, there is still one slot for a nominated member vacant. Hopefully, the UPA government will refrain from playing to the gallery, as it did in the case of Tendulkar and Rekha, in nominating a person to the Rajya Sabha. Our already beleaguered institutions can do without further battering.

The author is a Delhi-based journalist and can be reached at ashrafajaz3@gmail.com

(Sources of information: PRS Legislative Research and Rajya Sabha website)