Let us begin by discussing dimensions of obligation to differentiate political obligation from other dimensions and also to see what linkages they bear with each other: Obligation could be: (i) moral obligation, (ii) coercive obligation, (iii) legal obligation and (iv) political obligation.
Moral obligation: Moral obligation, as the term suggests, arises out of a sense of right or wrong and moral or ethical correctness of a conduct. For example, to help an old age person cross a busy road, not to mock at an impaired person, to tend to a stranger when he or she meets an accident on the road, to give alms to a needy person, or for that matter to speak the truth, are instances of morally obligated conducts. These are instances of moral duties of individuals as part of a social community. One needs not be a citizen of a particular state to do these duties. Whether I am in India or in any other country, I am morally obligated to perform these conducts towards other human beings.
However, there can be situations where one may feel morally obligated to perform certain duties even in a political context, i.e., as a citizen or a subject. For example, against the colonial rule, Indians felt it their moral obligation (besides their political and national obligations) to oppose the British rule in India. Gandhiji evolved a strategy of moral persuasion through Satyagraha to oppose the British rule. While to obey the British rule would have been part of political obligation, in a colonial situation to resist was based on moral obligation of self-esteem, national pride, self-rule and political independence. This suggests that moral obligation of a group of individuals, communities, nationalities, etc. may prove to be a limitation on political obligation. For example, moral obligation of Bangla speaking people as a community or nation in the then East Pakistan proved a limitation on political obligation for Pakistan as a nation-state. Many social movements such as those against untouchability, apartheid, slavery, discrimination against women, etc. arise from moral obligation of the affected members to oppose violation of human dignity in their persons.
Coercive obligation: Coercive obligation arises due to coercion or force behind it. This may suffer from absence of legitimate authority, as was the case with the colonial power when it elicited coercive obligation from the Indian people. However, in a democratic context also, the state uses force to coerce and elicit obedience of individuals to the law and political order and safeguard against rebellion, insurgency, violation of national interest and national sovereignty. It may happen that moral obligation of a group of people to resist the state and the authority, is countered by coercive force and coercive obligation. It is said that Gandhiji had realized that British power had massive coercive force and it would not be possible to counter that with a strategy based on force. To counter coercive obligation, he evolved the strategy of moral persuasion. Coercive obligation can also arise due to inducement by way of material gain. For example, it has been reported that in India, many candidates induce voters by offering material and monetary gains to get votes. When compared, moral obligations are carried because of moral correctness and irrespective of results, while coercive obligations are carried out largely due to fear of punishment and coercion. However, the coercion, which a voter undergoes due to material gain and inducement, is not due to fear of punishment or coercion but due to compromise on the very ideal of political democracy and free choice.
Legal obligation: Legal obligation arises out of requirements stipulated in laws and sanctions that it carries. One is obligated to follow and obey law as it is a command of the state either to protect sovereignty and national integrity, or to maintain law and social order, or to redistribute the resource of the society for equitable and just social order and welfare, or to enforce rights and liberties of groups and individuals. Legal obligations are fulfilled as they are backed by sanctions of the state and not obeying them would be illegal and punishable. While the moral obligation may debate the issue of right or wrong, legal obligation differentiates between legal or illegal.
Political obligation: Political obligation has a specific connotation. It implies relationship of the individual with the state where rights and obligations of both the individual and the State are defined. While the state provides a set of rights and secure them for its citizens, the citizens acknowledge the authority and law of the state. In modern democracy, this political relationship is described as citizenship. Citizens are carriers of both rights and obligations. Heywood describes this relationship when he says, ‘Citizenship… entails a blend of rights and obligations, the most basic of which has traditionally been described as “political obligation”, the duty of the citizen to acknowledge the authority of the state and obey its laws.’4 The extent, nature and justification of political obligation vary based on how the nature of sovereignty, state and its laws and the rights of the individual are viewed.
Ernest Barker in his Greek Political Theory: Plato and His Predecessors has stated that ‘it is the precedent condition of all political thought, that the antithesis of the individual and the State should be realized …’5 He further opines that without realization of this antithesis the ‘problems touching the basis of the State’s authority and the source of its laws’ cannot have any meaning. This means, there can be fundamental differences between the autonomy of the individual and his political obligation to the state. Barker hints that this should be realized and reconciled. This means that rights of the individuals and their obligations should be reconciled.
Leave a Reply