Excerpt from: http://www.epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=2005&leaf=02&filename=8284&filet ype=html
(Economic & Political Weekly, Feb 19, 2005) .. ... ... .. ... ... The Goan crisis brings to the fore once again questions about the nature of the checks and balances, the Constitution ostensibly devised to sustain democratic traditions - the role of the governor, the speaker and whether the anti-defection law is equipped with necessary safeguards. It is ironical that in a state more 'stable' than others, Goa's politicians continue to provide its only source of instability; reshaping and remodelling alliances to stave off 'instability' is perhaps linked to the very nature of the state. A population of 14 lakhs has 40 members to represent it; thus for the voter, individual appeal and the degree of familiarity a candidate cultivates matters more than party image. In Goa's pre-statehood days, the two older parties, the MGP and UGP, had clear representative bases. The former was mass-based whereas the UGP was dominated by landlords, including catholics and brahmins. But Goa has seen much transition since then. The 1970s saw land reform legislation, the 1980s onwards the state found increasing popularity as a tourist destination, more recently, it is a much sought after industrial hub. Yet, Goa's political leaders are clearly unable to give voice to the state's new, emerging identity and aspirations. For a stronger political ethos to emerge, it is simply not enough to put in place stricter constitutional measures that ensure political defectors are not rewarded, Goa's changing identity needs to be better reflected by people who want to represent it in government. ---------------------
