The practice of democracy is not only about following rules and regulations that have been written down, it is also dependent on following certain unwritten conventions that are in tune with the spirit of democracy. To run public and political institutions it is often necessary to appoint individuals who have been active in political life. Such individuals, once they assume office, are expected to be above party interests and to behave in a non-partisan manner. The classic example of this in India is the speaker of the Lok Sabha or of the legislative assembly. Individuals appointed as governors of states are also another example. But the unwritten convention of democratic practice is that when such individuals relinquish public office, they will not go back to their political careers. The reasoning behind this is very simple. Having once declared that they are neutral and non-partisan, they cannot revert to their parti pris position. To do so would be to undermine the independent and neutral attitude they had once assumed under oath.

In India, this simple convention is honoured only in the breach. Transgressions are far too many. Two recent cases could be taken as illustrations. M.S. Gill has just been appointed minister for sports and youth affairs by the prime minister, Manmohan Singh. Mr Gill had previously held the post of chief election commissioner, which, by definition, is an office the holder of which must be above all political parties. The taking of a ministerial portfolio by Mr Gill can easily raise questions about his neutrality when he was the chief election commissioner, or raise suspicions about the way he could have used his office to forge links with the ruling party for which he is now being rewarded. Such doubts may be misplaced, but it is also true that a chief election commissioner, even a quondam one, should, like Caesar’s wife, be above suspicion. The other case is that of S.M. Krishna, who was once the chief minister of Karnataka and was then elevated to be the governor of Maharashtra, from which he resigned to go back to spearhead the Congress election campaign in Karnataka. This sequence of events strongly suggests that as governor, Mr Krishna had maintained his political links with the Congress and was thus not above party politics. These instances only impoverish Indian democracy.