President of India

[Guest guest]

 

It was reported that

Pranab Mukherjee enjoyed the company of UP's biggest 

criminals at a lunch. It

was ostensibly to garner support for his presidential candidacy. It made me

think about our presidents.

 

The Indian

constitution provides for a president to head the nation. It is only a

ceremonial post, though. He has a symbolic presence. Unfortunately, nobody

knows what he is supposed to symbolize. He is more of a mascot of the Indian

democracy. Sometimes, a president remains just a caricature of the honourable

man we expect him to be.

 

There have been

different persons as presidents in our history. The first one was a product of

the freedom struggle and exuded the values that propelled us toward

independence. The second president was an erudite scholar. He had a love for

philosophy. His teachings were widely accepted as work of a high standard. The

third president was a man with an honourable intent. It is extremely difficult,

if not possible, to compare the successive presidents with the first three.

 

The presidents who

followed had nothing of real distinction in their life, perhaps with the

exception of one man. He is remembered as the people’s president. It is said

that he was a distinguished scientist who headed the country’s

missile-development programme. However, the real reason why the nation adored

him was his simplicity and goodness. He was an ascetic, undemanding. Others

were largely unsuitable to occupy the president’s chair. A few were even

somewhat dubious in their outlook. 

 

The president’s post

is a debatable necessity. Notwithstanding what is enshrined in the

constitution, neither the president himself nor the people know what he should

really do. This apart, there are other irritating issues related to the

president. Most of them have been unacceptably old and often infirm. They are

dull and frankly boring. They always have a funereal appearance. Their speeches

are depressing, having an effect opposite to the intended. It is doubtful

whether a sensible man would be pleased to meet them.  

 

The election for the

president, like any other election, degenerates into a tamasha. Interestingly,

the women who do not have ‘patis’ (there are four of them) will decide who

our next

‘Rashtrapti’ will be.

 

So what should be the

criteria for selecting a president? Most of us would like to set simple

standards. For example, any president who can promptly decide on the mercy

petitions by sentenced-to-death convicts would be seen as a good president.   

 

 Bharat