A case for sortition in Indian politics

One alternative to elections that is worthy of serious thought is what was called sortition in ancient Athens and medieval Lombardy in Italy. It was the method or mode of selecting ‘public officials or jurors by rotation and at random, i.e., by lottery, in order to obtain a representative sample’.

This philosophical premise does not claim that all human beings are equal; only that they have a common denominator which makes them capable and worthy of becoming actively involved in politics without any economic, educational or genetic prerequisites. The electoral method of ‘election by lot or lottery’ enables what Aristotle called ‘to govern and be governed in turn’. He went on to say that, “it is democratic when public offices are allocated by lot and oligarchic when filled by election.” It does not entail societies without leaders, but for societies in which everyone could be a leader. What it implies is, in C L R James’ phrase, ‘every cook can govern.’ Armed with a tongue-in-the-cheek, one can wonder why not a ‘crook’? One of the principal advantages that made this method so attractive was that it was seen as a, “way to avoid corrupt practices used by oligarchs to buy their way into office.” How amazing that it sounds so tailor-made for India! For ‘corruption’ is now integral to our way of life, and what Robert Michels called ‘the iron law of oligarchy’ fits like a glove to Indian democracy.

Although the preference for this way of choosing public officials soon faded away, it later got revived during the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period in countries like Spain and Switzerland. As a consequence, since the 1990s, historians, sociologists and political scientists have all shown renewed interest in this way of representation in decision-making. There is a growing sense that, “random selection of persons of average intelligence perform better than a collection of the best individual problem solvers, and that randomly-allocating decision-making is more efficient than representative democracy through elections. Elections are being seen as ‘ballot-box fetishism,’ and sortition as a model that preempts the need “to flatter an electorate, special interests or a party hierarchy to get re-elected.”

On the other hand, it also makes participation more egalitarian by giving all citizens an equal fighting chance to enter public office. While the merits of sortition can easily stand on their own ground, it is finding favor as a reaction, with the way elections have given governments in many democracies that benefit a few at the expense of the many. The immediate form it has taken is as citizens’ assemblies. The OECD has counted almost 600 examples of citizens’ assemblies, mostly in Europe, with members selected by lottery drawn from the general population to deliberate on important public questions so as to exert influence on parliament and public policies.

We should not dismiss this model on the ground that this too is a western implant, like our Constitution. There is now strong evidence not only that indigenous traditions of democracy in prehistoric India — such as the carvings in the temples of Uttaramerur village in present-day Tamil Nadu — indicate the incidence of this mode of local governance, but also that similar practices still prevail in certain Adivasi communities in states such as Jharkhand. It was embedded in grassroots democracy, and in the functioning of Vedic assemblies like sabhas, samitis and vidhatas and janapadas. By rotating membership, it makes power impermanent, something our ‘professional politicians’ should learn to live with. And it levels the political playing field, with little room for politics, prejudice and patronage. Or money and muscle power. It offers a better possibility that the weak and disadvantaged can feel participants in governance. It can help erase, if not greatly reduce, the unyielding and unhealthy influence of caste and religion on the Indian society. Contrary to the expectation that their clout will wilt, with development and improved living standards, their baneful ‘influence’ is now more entrenched. Analysts say that the latest 2024 election was “one of the most polarized”, with parties using caste and religion to garner votes. Some are even suggesting a “causal link between electoral politics and communal riots,” implying an incentive for parties to cause riots for electoral benefit.

The way forward

We have to follow a two-pronged strategy: (1) redouble the efforts to cleanse and winnow the present system in the short term; and (2) introduce sortition selectively.

The hardest thing is first to acknowledge not only that the present paradigm has failed beyond repair, but that it has seriously accentuated the schisms and scourges that have long been endemic to Indian polity. But there are few, if any, takers for such seismic and seminal change. Opponents fall into two typologies: an opportunistic alliance of vested interests that see nothing to gain but much too much to lose; a sprinkling of scattered but well-meaning citizens who will reject it as being ‘impractical’ and ‘unrealistic’. About the first we can’t do much, simply because they are the mainstream. The focus, therefore, should be on the second kind to create the ‘critical mass’ of conscientious citizens for spearheading this movement. To that end, we should fully harness the power of technology, particularly digital communication.

Implementation could start with Panchayats and other local bodies, which, if combined with constitutionally empowered grassroots governance, can go a long way to enhance the quality of democracy in India. At the most basic level of the daily lives of common folk, we will have a ‘government of the people, by the people and for the people’. At the state and national levels, we can continue with the present paradigm at least initially. With the epicenter of power shifting to the ground layer, their ‘negative’ influence will also be substantially contained. Admittedly, any such tectonic electoral transformation will call for perseverance, patience and pragmatism. Parallelly, we should set in motion a process to create thousands of Citizens’ Assemblies in India. That will exponentially make governance more representative, responsible and sensitive to people’s priorities.

The sum and substance is this. Elections have become a canker in the body politic. Almost nowhere or at no time do people’s wishes and views even come into play. The system of sortition clearly is a serious possibility to remedy this. It could, in one stroke, erase, or contain, many of the ills that beset the current electoral system: toxic politicization; caste and communal cards; vote-bank politics; money and muscle power. On the other hand, it might well open the probable possibility of higher representation to lower castes and weaker sections in making decisions that matter to them most.

By experimenting with a different mode of choosing our potential political masters, we have nothing to lose but our own venality, and much to gain in many ways. The time is now and also enough to make it happen.

P.S. For a more detailed and exhaustive analysis of this subject, please refer to section titled ‘From Elections to Sortition’ in the book, India — the Road to Renaissance; a Vision and an Agenda, Bhimeswara Challa; Gyan Books; 2024.

(Writer is a retired IAS officer of 1958 batch)