The Apex Court of India has been consistently critical of the practice of installing statues of political leaders using public funds. This issue, which frequently leads to public inconvenience and traffic congestion, has been a recurring point of contention. The court has repeatedly questioned the use of taxpayer money for such projects, emphasizing that public resources should be allocated for infrastructure and welfare programs that directly benefit citizens. The judiciary's stance is not limited to a single political party or case but applies broadly to all such instances across the country.
Judicial Intervention and Key Cases
The Supreme Court's strong position on this matter has been demonstrated in several key cases. One notable example is the court's reaction to the installation of statues of Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) founder Kanshi Ram during former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati's tenure. The court questioned the justification for spending vast sums of public money on these statues, highlighting that such expenses are a misuse of public funds.
More recently, the Supreme Court upheld a Madras High Court decision regarding a petition against the installation of a statue of former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi in Tirunelveli district. The High Court had ruled against the use of public funds for the statue, citing potential traffic issues and public inconvenience. The Supreme Court's endorsement of this ruling further solidified the judiciary's position against the practice.
The court reiterated its question, "Are you going to install statues of your leaders with public funds?" This rhetorical question underscores the judiciary's disapproval of the practice and its alignment with public interest.
Problem of Personification and Public Inconvenience
The proliferation of political statues in India is a reflection of the country's prevalent culture of personality cults. Political parties often compete to install statues of their leaders, both living and deceased, as a means of cementing their legacy and influence. This trend has not only led to the squandering of public money but has also created significant practical problems for citizens.
Traffic Congestion and safety hazards are main concern. Many of these statues are erected on already narrow roads and public spaces, obstructing traffic flow and increasing the risk of accidents. Drivers and pedestrians are forced to navigate around these structures, leading to bottlenecks and safety concerns.
Misuse of public funds is the cause for objections. The funds used for these statues, often collected from public taxes or donations, could be better utilized for essential public services like improving roads, building schools, and enhancing healthcare facilities. The installation of statues, sometimes of controversial figures or film personalities, on sacred or historically significant sites has also drawn criticism. The public's desire to honour national heroes like Swami Vivekananda is a separate issue from the politically motivated installation of statues that serve little public purpose and are often erected without public consent.
Supreme Court's pronouncements are not an attack on specific leaders or parties but a call for introspection on the part of the political class. The court's message is clear; the focus of governance should be on serving the public and addressing their needs, not on self-aggrandizement. The repeated judicial interventions highlight a systemic issue in Indian politics where the interests of the political elite are often prioritized over the welfare of the people. This trend will likely continue until political parties voluntarily change their approach and prioritize the responsible use of public resources.