An Award or a Reward?

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Government at the Centre has conferred Bharat Ratna on a slew of personalities in quick succession in the last one fortnight.

To argue if some of them deserved it or not does not bear any relevance. They were men of exceptional mettle and their accomplishments and contributions to the nation’s progress cannot be dismissed.

Karpoori Thakur known as Jan Nayak deserved it for the socialist orientation he imparted to the policies in Bihar.

Narasimha Rao should have been conferred it much earlier, for being instrumental in bringing about the paradigm shift in the Indian economy by heralding the liberalisation soon after assuming office in 1991.

Chaudhury Charan Singh, though held the reins of prime ministership for only six months, owed it to his leadership of the farmers.

Father of Green Revolution MS Swaminathan also should have been awarded it long before. It is rather unfortunate that it was awarded posthumously.

His contribution to the nation was outstanding in that he led the nation towards achieving self-sufficiency in food.

Though LK Advani's choice is controversial, the mere fact that he played a vital role in the national politics for over 50 years should have entitled him for the honour.

Yet few of the common observers of politics would have missed the essence of timing. The topmost award was instituted in 1954 and amended in 1966 and 2011.

It is awarded by the President of India on the advice of Prime Minister. Over the years, the Award has come to acquire political hues with the party in power deciding to confer it for political mileage rather than in recognition of the services of the personalities chosen.

Advani had long been consigned to the Margdarshak Mandal of the BJP by his protege, reigning Prime Minister Narendra Modi. So what is the rationale of conferring it on him now.

It is easy to find a link between the choice of Chaudhury Charan Singh and the ongoing parleys between the BJP and the Rashtriya Lok Dal over possible alliance during forthcoming Lok Sabha elections.

The party with a narrow base in Jat-dominated districts of Uttar Pradesh is currently led by Chaudhury's grandson Jayant Singh.

And much has already been written about the BJP's overtures to the Extremely Backward Classes (EBC) in Bihar whose late lamented leader Karpoori Thakur was conferred the Bharat Ratna a fortnight ago.

In fact, this acted as the bait to lure away Nitish Kumar and his Janata Dal United from the Mahagatbandhan in Bihar to the National Democratic Alliance. But for the JDU, the BJP's prospects were dim in Bihar.

This leaves only Mr. Narasimha Rao and Dr. MS Swaminathan in whose case the conferment of the honour does not show any obvious link as of now.

However, in case of Rao, the BJP might use it to woo a few Congressmen to its ranks in the two Telugu states as the Congress has been less than enthusiastic in embracing Rao’s legacy.

While the electoral expediency is too apparent to be missed in matters of the current choices, the award has hardly been free from controversy all through the six decades.

How were Prime Ministers Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi conferred Bharat Ratna during their reign in office? It is relevant to ask if they recommended their own names to the President?

How could the Government confer Bharat Ratna on five personalities this year while the Home Ministry rules specify that only three could be awarded in a year?

Above all, shouldn’t these honours follow certain guidelines and shouldn’t the Government be barred from using it for political advantage. Is it not right to ask if the Award has been turned into a reward?