Along Longkumer
Consulting Editor
Lal Krishna Advani’s resignation (later retracted) from all posts that he held in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had come as an unexpected development. No doubt Mr Advani had been openly opposed to the elevation of Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi as Chairman of the party’s election campaign committee for the 2014 General Election. However, the manner in which the 85 year old patriarch decided to take on the current BJP leadership has led to a major crisis for the party and also the NDA as it prepares to take on the Congress led UPA Alliance. While this column will not get into the debate about Mr Modi or Mr Advani and the internal politics within the saffron outfit, yet this has also raised an interesting question as to whether there should be a retirement age for politicians.
One argument says that there is a fixed retirement age for every other profession. A bureaucrat has to call it quits at the age of 60. A judge has to retire at the age of 65. Even in Nagaland, government employees have to retire after 33 years of service or 60 years whichever is earlier. But there is no such limit for a politician. Senior Naga politician and Congressmen Dr SC Jamir, who is now Governor of Odisha, would always tell us journalists that there is no age limit for politicians and that there was no question of him retiring from politics. This is the other argument by those who take the view point that there is no need to fix a retirement age for politicians. And in one way this argument is valid because the lifespan of a politician can be uncertain. Politicians are not appointed but they are elected to perform a task. If they do well they can be re-elected or thrown out by the electorate if they fail to live upto people’s expectation.
But think about this. If we look at it from a larger perspective, an aging politician or even an aging sportsperson is not uncommon to India’s culture unlike say in the United States or some other developed countries where people would ‘hang up their boots’ when still at the peak of one’s career. Even a cricket idol like Sachin Tendulkar continues to play for the country despite his age and dip in recent form. Coming back to politicians, take the exemplary case of Bill Clinton, one of the most popular and critically acclaimed President in American history. Clinton became President at age 46 and served out two terms as President. When he left office he was still only 54 years of age. Off course under the American law, a person cannot serve for more than two terms i.e. 8 years as President. In India where the Parliamentary system prevails, there is no such limit as long as one gets elected; he or she will continue to serve the public. Doesn’t it also imply that if we want older politicians to retreat, the voters must elect younger leaders rather than giving mandate to the same old people? Change can come about by way of people’s participation in the political process.
Having said that, at the end of the day there can really be no specific retirement age for politicians. The decision should be a voluntary one and should be guided by conscience. One can learn from the inspiring life of Nelson Mandela who despite his towering personality served as President of South Africa for a single term i.e. from 1994 to 1999. Given the sacrifice and contribution he made for his country, Mr Mandela could have stayed on in power but he declined to run for a second term, subsequently becoming an elder statesman. Timing is important for a politician. One should not leave it too late at the cost of one’s credibility. Hopefully when the time comes, a leader in the stature of Advani will also pave way for the next rung of leaders to take over. This will be the honorable thing to do for aging politicians.
(Feedback can be send to consultingeditormex@gmail.com)
