The authors of the Constitution were clear about whom they wanted “nominated” to the Rajya Sabha. The 12 seats in the “House of Elders” are not meant to be filled by “party political loyalists” of the ruling party of the day, or by “sarkari” and “darbari” professionals, or by those who can help “tilt” the balance in favour of one group or another in Parliament. Read the Constitution: The Council of States shall consist of, apart from the “representatives of states”, “twelve members to be nominated by the President in accordance with the provisions of clause (3)”. What does this clause specify? That “the members to be nominated by the President” shall consist of persons having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of such matters as the following: Literature, science, art and social service. Consider now the eight nominated members of the Rajya Sabha who will retire next month: Kuldip Nayar, Shabana Azmi, Raja Ramanna, Mrinal Sen, C. Narayana Reddy, Selvi Das, Kartar Singh Duggal and Chaudhury Harmohan Singh Yadav. Everyone may not recognise all the names, but most of them do fit the bill. When the president considers the names of their replacements next month he will have to ensure that the new nominees are suitable. Against this background, it is curious to see news reports that suggest the ruling BJP hopes to “tilt” the scales in its favour in the Rajya Sabha after eight of the existing nominated members retire and are replaced by party faithfuls. This very proposition is insulting to those whom the president will invite to join the Rajya Sabha. Merely because some of the existing nominated members behave like loyalists of the party in power, does not mean that they all do. A person of eminence would like to believe that she is being nominated to the Rajya Sabha by the president to bring to the proceedings of this house a certain knowledge in areas where elected representatives may not be well versed. This year the community of Indian sportspersons have demanded a voice in the Rajya Sabha through this route, and why not? There are sportspersons of distinction who can educate our lawmakers on how to improve the nation’s performance in this field. There are scholars, scientists, social scientists of eminence whose voice on a wide spectrum of issues must be heard. Merely because there is one film actress and one editor in the present lot does not mean why in every group of the nominated dozen there should be representation given to the film and media sectors, which anyway don’t do too badly in the Lok Sabha and in the states’ list in the Rajya Sabha.
