 Is it correct that the amended version of the para 7.17 of the Party Programme wherein you have proposed to join a government at the centre as well, is the result of the Party’s acknowledgement of its mistake in not joining the central government, under the leadership of Comrade Jyoti Basu? Is it quite natural as we knew from the writing of a senior comrade that it was the word `states’ as the suffix of government that had debarred the Central Committee from joining the central government. Please confirm if my presumptions are correct. Sunil Baran Chakraborty, Kolkata, West Bengal THE revised formulation in the Party Programme in Para 7.17 clarifies the position of the Party regarding joining governments in the states and at the centre. It is true that the Programme adopted in 1964 envisaged joining governments in the states where the Party and the Left-led coalitions could win the support of the people. This tactical question, not a programmatic/strategic issue was included in the Programme as the Kerala mid-term election was expected to come up in 1965 and the CPI(M) contesting as a party for the first time, may have been in a position to form a government. So the paragraph (112) gave the tactical direction on Party’s participation in state governments. The first time, the question of joining a government at the centre came up was in 1996 after the general election when the proposal came to make Jyoti Basu the prime minister. The Central Committee decided not to join the government on the same grounds that it would not join state governments where it had no sufficient strength to shape policies and get them implemented. There were also other reasons for not joining a government which would be dominated by bourgeois parties. These were spelt out at that time and this stand was endorsed by the 16th Congress of the Party, where this decision was reviewed. When the Central Committee took the decision, it was not on the basis that the Programme does not sanction joining governments at the centre and it is only for the states. The approach to joining the governments in the states and the centre is basically the same. There is, however, a difference in the nature of the state governments and the central government. State power resides with the central government and not in the state governments. So it is not correct to presume that the updated Programme adopted in 2000 included the issue of joining governments at the centre, as an acknowledgment of the mistake made in not joining the government in 1996. It was done to explain that this is a tactical question to be decided at the relevant time and sets out the circumstances in which such a decision should be taken. We will have to assess the strength of the Party and the Left and democratic forces inside parliament and outside and the capacity to put in place an alternative set of policies and the struggle to implement them. Q. Lakhs and lakhs of our people continue to languish in penitentiaries (jails) all over the country. Ipso facto, they are deprived of their voting rights. That apart, service personnel and policemen, albeit have voting right no facilities are made available to them for franchising their votes. However, unmindful of these stark realities, the NDA government appears to be over active in bestowing voting rights to all the NRIs with inherent provision for proxy voting. Does this not tantamount to commodification of such votes? How our Party approaches this proposition? G Rajamani, Chennai THE Supreme Court has ordered that Indian citizens residing abroad should be allowed to vote through e-voting. The Election Commission is also considering allowing them to vote through proxy in India. The CPI(M) is not in favour of e-voting i.e., voting through email for the non-resident Indians. This is a method which is liable for misuse and manipulation. The proposal to allow a proxy vote is worse as this will open the floodgates for the purchase of voting rights by proxy from people abroad. The whole concept of allowing direct voting for NRIs is flawed, when inside the country lakhs of migrant workers are unable to exercise their franchise from their place of work. So far, proxy voting is allowed only for armed forces personnel who are stationed in the border areas. As for the lakhs of undertrial prisoners in jail, at present they have no voting rights as per the law. This is unfair. Persons who have been in jail and have got bail can exercise their franchise. By and large it is the poor who are languishing as undertrials because they cannot get bail. There should be a distinction made between undertrial prisoners and those who are convicted. The law should be changed to enable undertrial prisoners to exercise their franchise.