Do politicians need to be educated?

 

What happened? 

Last week, Unacademy fired a teacher who, during an online class, appealed to the students to vote for educated candidates. The ed-tech company justified that the teacher, Karan Sangwan, had violated his contract by sharing his personal opinions and views. 

Why does it matter? 

In the viral video, Sangwan could be heard telling his students to ‘elect educated leaders who understand things and don’t just change names’. He was apparently discussing the recent bill tabled in the Lok Sabha by Home Minister Amit Shah that seeks to replace British-era laws (read our coverage of the bills here). That’s why many allege that Sangwan was fired due to political pressure. 

Whether teachers should be allowed to discuss their personal opinions in class or not is a separate debate, but his view raised an important point of discussion on the educational qualification of political candidates. The Constitution of India lays down certain eligibility criteria for MPs and MLAs, but educational qualification doesn’t find any mention. Do we need reforms? 

What are the arguments from both sides? 

Side 1: Education qualification must be a criterion: 

• Decision making: Education enhances a person’s decision-making abilities by providing them with knowledge and sharpening their critical thinking skills. An educated policymaker can better evaluate situations, arguments, and complex information. Therefore, they can make better decisions for the public good. 

• Development: We live in an age where the world is witnessing rapid technological growth. Educated policymakers will be better equipped to grasp the new technology and use them for the economic development of our nation. There’s empirical evidence that shows a correlation between a political leader's educational qualification and the region's economic growth during the leader's tenure in office. 

• Need for Reform: The reason why the criterion of education wasn’t included in the constitution is that when it was formed, illiteracy was rampant in India. And the constitution makers believed that such criteria would mean excluding most of the population from contesting elections. Now that the literacy rate has risen in India (by three folds), we need to reform the criteria. 

Side 2: Education qualification must NOT be a criterion: 

• Wisdom: A good policymaker isn’t required to be a highly-educated person. They need remarkable knowledge of society and the aspirations of the people they represent. Most uneducated policy-makers have practical wisdom, and they’re greatly connected with the people. Therefore, if education becomes a mandatory criterion, such qualified people wouldn’t be able to participate in politics. 

• Advisors: There are advisory committees in diverse fields that help the government make better decisions. The experts on the committee bridge the gap in knowledge and analytical skills and offer valuable insights to the policy-makers. Well-educated bureaucrats also provide their advice to policymakers. They’re actually the ones who translate the government’s policies into actionable plans and strategies. 

• Elitism: Though the literacy rate has increased in the past seven decades, India remains a very unequal place. Not everybody has access to the same resources for education. If the criterion is applied, historically backward castes and the poor class would be excluded from participating in politics. This would violate the very spirit of democracy. 

What’s next? 

Karan Sangwan, the ex-Uncademcy teacher, has clarified that his remarks weren’t targeted at any specific government or political party. 

Due to the lack of focused debate on the criterion of education qualification in the public sphere, it’s hard to say when the topic would be discussed in parliament.