RIGHT TO RECALL

A PRESENTATION FROM GROUP

16 IITD STUDENTS
1.HIMANSHU UPADHYAY
2.PRANAV PRATAP SINGH
3.AKSHAY HOODA
4.PRASHANT MEENA

FOCUSSING ON THE POINT OF VIEW OF RAHUL MEHTA

 Aspect Ratio Test
(Should appear
circular)

4x3

16x9
 Right to Recall in short
 So what is this "Right to
Recall" in short?
 It means exact procedure
by which citizens replace
PM, Supreme Court
judges, CM, MPs, MLAs,
Reserve Bank Governor or
any official from PM to
Collector to Sarpanch if
the need be.
RAHUL MEHTA : AN INTRODUCTION
 An IIT graduate and a
software developer by
profession, Mehta says
he does not accept any
donations and funds his
campaign all by himself.
 He has also written a
book called “301 right
to recall”
 RIGHT TO RECALL GLOBALLY
Currently the law of “Right to Recall” exists in five countries. It is effectively applied and used in
USA and Switzerland. (Source:Wikipedia.org)
In USA, the recall referendum exists for local jurisdictions. In 19 states it is applicable to
recall State officials. It is not incorporated in the constitution yet. The requirements vary
depending on the states, but the common factor is his non-compliance of his duties, like,
incompetency, felony, involvement in corrupt act, misconduct, etc. It requires 20% to 40%
votes, depending on the states requirement, from the voters participated in the last election.
(Source: NCSL.org)
In Switzerland it exists in six cantons. It requires 2% – 13% adult votes, depending on the
cantons voting requirement, to trigger a recall referendum. (Source: JSTOR)
Venezuela‘s constitution has a provision described in article 72, where once the
representative has finished his 1/2 term then a motion for revocation can be called and
requires 25% voting of the registered voters who voted earlier. (Source: Analitica.com)
Australia is also advocating and educating to implement Right to Recall. (Source: ALOR)
RIGHT TO RECALL – AN INDIAN PERSPECTIVE
“Right to Recall” referendum, recalling representatives, is important and necessary
feature of an effective Governance.
 HISTORY OF RIGHT TO RECALL
 Right to Recall” referendum, recalling
representatives, is important and necessary
feature of an effective Governance system. This
system of recall has its origins in Vedic culture
and is more than 5000 years old. Later in
medieval times it is termed as “Rajdharma“.
Various forms of Rajdharma can be found in various
texts likeDharmashastras, Nitishastras, Mimamsa,
Manusmriti, Narad-smriti, Raja
Kalasya Karnam, andArthashastras. Not all the texts
have been translated yet, especially the legal and
socio-political aspects, the role of the King and the
citizens. Various scholars are trying to unearth these
old “Smriti”s. These texts also mentions about the
existence of “Jury” system in the court.
 History Continued………
M N. Roy, a radical humanist of India, in 1944 proposed an alternative system of political
economy emphasising decentralisation and devolution of power, which would be in tune with his
humanistic approach of restoring sovereignty to the individual in society with a right to recalling
their representatives.(New Humanism, page 13, 62). Jayprakash Narayan, the “Loknayak” in
1950 demanded “Right To Recall” in “Total revolution”, and is supported by Nitish Kumar, CM
Bihar, in this TOI article. In 2008, Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee advocated a system of
‘Right of Recall’ of a legislator as a possible remedy to the misconduct by members of Parliament
and legislatures. But the outcome of the round table had mixed views and most of the
members opined it is a recipie for chaos given the political scenario existing in
India.(Source: thehindu.com)
 "Right To Recall (RTR)" is a proposed law in India that would allow citizens to replace public servants holding
key posts in the government.[1]
Proposed by a Non Registered group called Right to Recall Group this law will reduce corruption and give
.

more power to the citizens.
 Following is the description of one of the most important Govt Order Right to Recall Group propose-
demand and promise to fix the corruption of India - Right to Recall Lokpal
 1. Any citizen of India can pay a deposit same as MP election to the district collector and register himself as a
candidate for LOKPAL CHAIRPERSON
 2. Any citizen of India can walk to Talati’s office, pay Rs 3 fee, approve at most five persons for LOKPAL
CHAIRPERSON position. The Talati will give him a receipt with his voter-id# and the persons he approved.
(With coming of Secure sms system/ATM system, the cost will be few paise)
 3. A citizen can cancel his approvals any day as well.
 4. The Talati will put the preferences of the citizen on Lokpal’s website with citizen’s voter-ID number and his
preferences.
 5. If a candidate gets approval of over 24 crore citizen voters and one crore more than existing lokpal, then
existing LOKPAL CHAIRPERSON may resign and appoint the person with highest approval as LOKPAL
CHAIRPERSON.
 These procedures can also be used by citizens to RETAIN and bring back an honest person if he has been
wrong fully been removed by some authority and also to REJECT a dishonest person.
 Similar will be the draft for other posts at national/state level like PM, CM, ministers, RBI governor, Supreme
Court Judges etc. Just replace the word `lokpal` with PM, CM etc. And the threshold level given in point no. 5
will vary with the post and will be finalised via Transparent Complaint Procedure via majority approval of
voters.
 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
OF RIGHT TO RECALL INSTRUMENT
 Proponents of the recall mechanism argue that it acts as a discipline
on elected officials, in that elected representatives will be less likely
to make unpopular decisions if it may make them more likely to be
the subject of a recall campaign. However, the same argument is
also used against the recall: opponents argue that the recall
mechanism completely undermines representative government by
making elected officials afraid to make unpopular but necessary
decisions.
 A further argument in favour of direct democracy is that it provides
voters with the continued opportunity to make a democratic decision
about who governs them, since they do not have only one
opportunity every three to five years to elect the people who will
represent them, but retain a degree of control over the decision for
the duration of the office.
 However, it is claimed by opponents of the recall that the mechanism
could be used irresponsibly, and that it could be used by political
parties as a political weapon against rival incumbents. The claim that
the recall mechanism was being used as a political tool was made
by many Democrats against Republican activists in relation to the
2003 California Recall
 APPROACH TOWARDS SOLUTION
Q:How can the Swiss principle be implemented?
A: In the same way that the Australian people created their own Federal Constitution. The
concept first grew in the minds of farsighted men. It had to be fostered by a
grassroots movement. Only when the public demand becomes strong enough will the principle
be adopted by the politicians. If present politicians will not pledge to work to introduce the
principle, or permit the electors to decide by referendum whether or not they want to have the
principle implemented, they will have to be replaced by others who will. There are no short-cuts
to success; hard work is required by dedicated people along with the use of the type of
innovations developed by the pioneers of the Australian nation.

In Newzealand, a better argument, its pros and cons, is provided by Steve Baron.
(Source: Better Democracy) Examples of Right to Recall in USA, Canada and consideration
in UK. (Source:UCL.ac.uk)
 Don’t we need “Right to Recall” in Indian
Governance system?
In my opinion, India requires electoral reforms to implement RTR. The reason being, we have too
many corrupt politicians and RTR might create a chaos and will be an expensive treat to India.
Thus it will be disastrous for India to implement at National level. The best approach will be
bottom-up, implementing at Municipal levels and move upwards. Here is the example of
Chattisgarh Province, probably for the first time in India, the Nagar Palika Act of Chattisgarh
Province, which gives ‘the right to recall’ to the citizens, has taken a toll of three civic chiefs who
were voted out of their office recently. ( Ground Report – Link provided by Vishal K. Singh FTI
member)
 Steve Baron had put a list of arguments, which he addressed in the his document, of Answers to Arguments Against Direct Democracy. They
are listed below: Voters lack competence and good information to make sensible decisions
 The public are irresponsible and will only support Referendums that promise short term benefits



.
Moneyed interests & the media decide referendums
Referendums are a tyranny of the majority & harm minorities and civil rights
 Referendums do not allow for compromise
 We elect MPs to represent us, let the professionals do their jobs
 This removes the need for political parties and Weaken democracy
 There would be referendums every day of the week, This is government by referendum
 Referendums are badly drafted & Misleading
 Referendums lead to demagoguery and mob rule
 Referendums are too expensive
 Referendums stifle innovation and damage the economy
 Radical minorities will disrupt society by forcing referendums
 Do referendums favour Conservatives or Liberals? the left or the right?
 Referendums should have minimum thresholds & turnout requirements
 Referendums should be limited to certain uses
 Would the Government be bound by the result of a referendum?
 Two final year students, of New Law College, Bharati Vidyapeeth University, Pune have submitted their essay on “Right to Recall: Need of
Democracy” which is interesting to read. This article throws some light on merits and demerits of this RTR referendum.
(Source: mightylaws.in)
 MERITS
Recall is a process which enables voters dissatisfied with an elected
official to replace him before the expiry of his term of office, which
will make them more accountable to the people. The ‘recall’ device
has also the potential to encourage the citizens to keep themselves
side by side of contemporary public issues in order to monitor the
conduct of their elected representatives. It provides a way for citizens
to retain control over elected officials who are not representing the
best interests of their constituents, or who are unresponsive or
incompetent. This mechanism holds that an elected representative is
an agent, a servant and not a master in a democratic state.
 DEMERITS
How will the government determine whether the petition submitted to
it for the recall of the elected representatives carry the signatures of
the genuine voters? How will it be ensured that the signatures of such
a large number of people have not been forged? It can lead to an
excess of democracy, where the threat of a recall election lessens the
independence of elected officials. It undermines the principle of
electing good officials and giving them a chance to govern until the
next election, and that it can lead to abuses by well-financed special
interest groups. It will only compound an already problem-ridden
system. Country like India is not in a position to hold election so
frequently.
 DISCUSSION AND COMPARISON :
CREDITS : RAHUL MEHTA
You must have heard from your relatives, friends in US that the corruption in US police\courts is far less than
corruption in India’s police\courts. Every NRI in India must have noticed this from day one. And this must have been
a mystery to you – why are the policemen\judges in US far less corrupt? Are the policemen\judges in US so stupid,
compared to the policemen\judges of India, that they can’t think of clever ways to extort bribes from their citizens?
Surely, they are not so stupid. Are they so coward that they can’t muster courage to arm twist citizens and squeeze
bribes from them? Surely not ; they are as courageous as policemen in India – no less. Then are all
policemen\judges in US saints free from greed? No. There can’t be millions of greed-free people in any country.
Then is higher salary alone main reason for low corruption? Well, lets say we double the salaries of our
policemen\judges in India this week; then will they will they give us even 10%

discount in bribes starting next week? For example, in 2009-2010, Govt tripled the salaries of all judges. Did the
judges give even 10% discount in bribery next day? I guess not. If a GoI employee thinks that his salary should be
twice of what he is getting, and so he needs bribes, then does he stop taking bribes after collecting bribes equal to
30 years of salary difference? No, most of them never stop. So salary is surely an important issue, but not a major
factor to create the difference between levels of corruption in India and US. Then what else can be the reason?.
 Is our culture a reason?
Many intellectuals (ku-buddheejeevies?) of India have 4 digits IQ, and they say that policemen
in India are more corrupt because we commons are uneducated, unaware, lack moral character,
we have bad political culture etc. IOW, as per these intellectuals with 4 digit IQ, we the citizens
are responsible for the corruption in policemen\judges !! These “blame the victim” explanation
given by intellectuals with 4 digit IQ is something I dismiss as a white lie. It reeks and stinks like
“women are responsible for rapes”. The whole argument of “citizens don’t have awareness” is a
total humbug. Even most illiterate person is very much aware that corruption is immoral and it is
crime. And surely all policemen, judges, Ministers are very much aware that corruption is illegal
and immoral. And even when education in US was less than 5% in year 1800s, they did not
have such corrupt police, courts etc. Hence IMO, lesser education is a non-issue and “citizens lack
awareness” is total humbug cooked up by intellectuals with 4 digit IQ.
 Real Reason
Lets divide police force in two broad parts – junior officers

like Constables\Inspectors and seniors like District Police Commissioner. The Police Constables in US don’t take bribe
because District Police Commissioner in US spends a lot of his time in setting traps. So a Constable knows that 1 out
100-500 law violator is a trap set by Commissioner and he might land in prison if he dares to ask for bribes. E.g.
when I was in US from 1990-1998. I was stopped by Constables 5 times for traffic violations. The constables fined
me three times and pardoned me two times, but didn’t even hint that they were interested in bribes. Why? The
main reason being : he knew that 1 out 200 such traffic violators are traps set by Commissioner and he doesn’t
know which one is the trap. So he forgoes bribes in all 200 cases. And many nodal officers in US like District
Education Officer, District Public Prosecutors, Governors etc set traps against officers, Ministers, judges. The
occasional traps keep all junior staff bribe free.
So this explains why junior staff is less corrupt. But then why does Police Commissioner of US set traps to stop
bribes while Police Commissioner in India orders Constables to collect bribes? Why the difference? Why doesn’t
Police Commissioner of US also give targets to Constables? The one and only reason is : citizens in US have
procedure to expel District Police Chief. IOW, if citizens in an US district want to expel District Police Chief they
don’t need to approach DIG/CM and file useless complaints. They do not need to approach High Court judges and
file worthless PILs. The citizens in US only need to prove that majority district voters want Police Commissioner to be
expelled. And once the majority is proven against a District Police Chief, he is expelled and no High Court judge or
Supreme Court judge dares to throw stay order and delay his expulsion. Likewise, if citizens in US want to expel
CM, Mayor, District judge, District Public Prosecutor, District Education Officer etc they don’t need to approach
 CREATIVE EXPLANATION : CREDITS :
RAHUL MEHTA
Atharvaved can explain low corruption in US policemen. How? Chap-6 of Satyarth Prakash is Raaj Dharm. In this
chapter, Swami Dayanand enumerates powers of citizens, officers, Ministers, judges and their duties. In the very
first page of chap-6, Swami Dayanand establishes the foundation of Raaj-Dharm. He gives two words – “Prajaa-
aadheen Raajaa”. And in these two words, he summarizes 10000 proposals on good politics. And then he
elaborates : “Raajaa must be Prajaa-aadheen, or else he will rob the citizens and destroy the nation”. And he has
taken shlokas from Atharvaved. And a cursory comparison of India’s Police Commissioner, Ministers, judges etc with
US Police Commissioner, Ministers, judges etc shows how correct the sages who wrote Atharvaved and Swami
Dayanand are. The citizens in US have procedures to expel their District Police Chief, CM etc i.e. they are all
Prajaa-aadheen, and so Police Chief, judges, CM etc in US don’t rob citizens but protect citizens Whereas citizens
in India cant expel or do any damage to Police Chief, CM etc and thus they are not Prajaa-aadheen. And so we
see that most Ministers, judges in India are busy robbing us commons. How apt is the analogy of
Maharshi Dayanand – “just as carnivorous animal eats other animals, a Raajaa who is not Prajaa-aadheen would
rob his citizens”. And thus of all things in this world – two words from Satyarth Prakash explain why corruption in
US police is low. And to me, it is an utter irony that I have to give example of US to prove the worthiness of these
two words of Satyarth Prakash. Right to Recall means procedures by which citizens can expel/replace PM, CM,
judges, Police Chief etc. This system came in US in 1800 AD. Today, corruption in US police and courts is much less
than India. And the only reason is that citizens in US have procedures by which they can replace Governors, Police
Chief, judges, Govt lawyers etc. In Europe, Karl Marx had demanded Right to Recall in 1871. In India, 1946 M N
Roy in his book “Draft Constitution of India” had put utmost emphasis on Right to Recall. M N Roy had said
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND
THANKS
 I would like to thank out professor SK
Gupta for giving us the opportunity
to make this project.
 And thanks to my team members who
helped a lot to develop the content.
 Some content and discussion section
are taken from Rahul Mehta
webpage and wikipedia and other
sources mentioned earlier.So credit
goes to them as well.
 Aspect Ratio Test
(Should appear
circular)

4x3

16x9
END OF SLIDES : THANK YOU VERY MUCH
।। मत
् स्कृ सं ोमन , मतराभ
् ोमन ।।
We are in for the movement  Are you?? -----Himanshu,Pranav,Akshay,Prashant