Institution, person and public.

Institution, person and public.

Many a times when we observe any institution private or public, charitable or business we see certain names dominate its functioning may be for good or bad reasons. In a political party a leader may emerge well ahead of the political ideology and team work. Sometimes it is because of a person’s dedication to the institution and at other time it may be manipulative bossism and dictatorship.

The author and his wife during their preparation for an examination were travelling a stretch of eighty kilometers by train daily up and down to read in the competitive and interactive atmosphere of a medical college. Many people travelled for treatment at the premier institute of the state. They gossiped taking the names of individuals such as Professor x or y whom they presumed as good. I pretended busy reading my materials but actually thought, nobody is talking about the institution and showing confidence on any team on duty instead they would search x or y. If they get him or her it is ok or else they have to visit the doctor’s private clinic.

Not only that, they discussed Sachin, Ganguly, Dravid, Macgrath, Warne, Ponting not Indian or Australian team.

There was election commission before Mr TN Seshan became its chief. It was a standard GK question and we as students were memorizing their names. I may be correct if I say Mr Perishastri was his predecessor but that is with effort. Seshan didn’t pass any new law, he enforced the existing laws unbiased and did more to Indian democracy than any other single individual in any capacity. An illiterate village voter who had a little interest in electioneering also could know the man and something called model code of conduct. He as a person shaped an institution in such a way that his successors can never degrade it to a larger degree even if they are lesser known. Here an individual superseded an institution to institutionalize the required autonomous character of it.

 Indian politics in our life time ie Mrs Indira Gandhi onwards did a see saw movement from individual to collective team work and back to individual and so on. Mrs Gandhi kept her party in total control if we think her and Sri Sanjay Gandhi in civil emergency as a single unit. It is not that she did not do any good. 1971 war, bank nationalization, green revolution, coming back to power in 1980 all as per my small knowledge needed tremendous resolution which she had. But the emergency, the destruction of internal democracy for all time beyond correction, the blue star operation all these was byproduct of person above institution style of functioning. We also saw great team effort during modern time. The success of Jayprakashji movement in 1977, the success of Atalji to complete his tenure leading a coalition, the communists joining Congress to make the best among all the governments after 1977 that is the UPA 1 passing important bills like RTI, Domestic Violence, Right to education, National rural employment guarantee scheme etc all these were team effort not dictatorship. Atalji started the Pradhanmantri Grama Sadak yojana not naming it after any leader suggests how person before institution became less important. Obviously this is the single best government scheme that revolutionized not only rural connectivity but also rural mindset.

Once again a person, our present prime minister has emerged as more important than his party.  His party men and opponents may or may not agree with this. It is more difficult as his party is a more cadre based and organized set up where the original power center and the party head are different. With this also he has emerged ahead. People’s love and hate both are more concentrated for or against him. People imagined unachievable gains from him. Detractors compared him with demon, almost a similar situation that was with Mrs Indira Priyadarshini.

People expect conclusive result like 1971 war victory, complete ache din, other people fear fascism, civil emergency like situation, all having good logic. But Leonel Messi with all his brilliancy is not giving success to Argentina neither Sachin Tendulkar own the world cup till MSDhoni formed the perfect team.

Comparison is always bad, we cannot neutralize the effect of era she worked in an era having no mobile phone, no RTI, no leader like Sakhi Moharaj, or the minister who tells farmers are committing suicide not due to debt and crop failure reasons. More ever there was no social media or philosophy of alternate politics. I mean the situation at that time was not as volatile as now. So probably we hardly require a JP movement. The Delhi assembly election proved how volatile the situation is.

In the alternative politics also the hype was too high people directly compared with MKG even. But they even failed behaving sober before the victory lunch was over. Driving people out of party is never a solution changing the errant is the real leadership. People cannot raise their voice. So there supporters even if claim he is the ultimate leader should remember he is a person not institution. The party philosophy, honesty, working agenda, fulfilling commitment all may be very fine but here we are discussing person or institution and the early indication says it has turned to the direction of a hero not a team.

This is not only happening in national political power struggle also in small spheres. I have seen a friend who as a doctor worked in a place day and night and put his institution above him, consciously did not promote his own private clinic. People got benefit. People didn’t like to create disturbances in the hospital. People appreciated and the work atmosphere became an integration of a person, an institution and public. Not only public but also inside the institution he had a voice to keep internal discipline.

He got transferred to another place and the condition there is different that is beyond the minimum acceptable pro public. It is correctable but he is not motivated. Result is change of adjectives like he is a ferrari doctor, cheat and inefficient. The problem for him is to differentiate between the person in him and the institution in his front. If he speaks for the institution then it needs too much change beyond his capacity and to the discomfort of others. He can never speak for the person and personal gain for which his scope has increased many fold. The person prefers to withdraw himself from the mesh. I wish my friend all success and feel he can.

Whatever may be the discussion an institution is far more important than a person and should be the priority everywhere at all spheres small or big as the person is mortal unlike the institution. 

(To be edited later)