Politics is voluntary—so why salaries, pensions privileges, and
Politics, at its core, is meant to be a voluntary service—a commitment to the welfare, development, and well-being of the people. Yet, in reality, political office in many parts of India, including Jammu & Kashmir, has increasingly become a source of personal gain, luxury, and influence. Politicians with little of their own continue to enjoy lavish lifestyles at public expense, often until their last day, with minimal accountability. Retired officials who enter politics—seeking votes in the name of voluntary service—become MLAs, MLCs, or ministers, drawing double pensions and additional perks. Meanwhile, many politicians accumulate substantial wealth and properties over their careers with no proper checks or accountability. This pattern reflects a systemic misuse of public resources and a culture where politics serves the self, not the public.
Politcs Should Be Voluntary—But It Isn’t: Ideally, politics should be a platform for voluntary public service. Leaders are entrusted with authority and resources to ensure citizens’ welfare, safety, and development. Public office is a responsibility, not a career. However, in practice, politics has become a source of financial security and personal enrichment. Salaries, allowances, pensions, and perks—sometimes doubled for retired officials—create incentives that shift focus from serving citizens to securing personal comfort. When remuneration becomes the primary motivation, citizens’ needs—such as infrastructure, healthcare, and education—take a backseat. Leaders prioritize perks and privileges for themselves, often amassing wealth and properties without transparency or oversight. If politics were truly voluntary, it would attract those genuinely committed to public welfare rather than personal enrichment.
Double Pensions, Privileges: The practice of double pensions is one of the clearest examples of self-serving politics. Retired government officials entering politics continue to draw pensions while receiving salaries and allowances as elected representatives. While legally permissible in some states, this practice raises ethical concerns. It highlights a broader misalignment between personal gain and public responsibility. Leaders focus on securing benefits for themselves, maintaining luxurious lifestyles, and consolidating influence. Combined with unchecked accumulation of wealth and properties, this undermines trust in governance and fosters a culture of entitlement.
The Human Cost Of Self-Serving Leadership: The consequences of self-centered leadership are evident in citizens’ daily lives. In Jammu & Kashmir, decades of mismanagement and personal gain over public service have left infrastructure in disrepair. Roads remain incomplete, electricity supply is inconsistent, and essential services such as healthcare and education lag far behind public expectations. Funds that could have been spent on schools, hospitals, roads, and water supply projects are often diverted to perks, allowances, and personal enrichment. Citizens face inefficiency, neglect, and hardship, while politicians enjoy state-funded luxury and accumulate assets with minimal scrutiny.
Historical, Cultural Context: Self-serving politics has deep historical roots. Over decades, Indian political systems have allowed wealth and power to concentrate in the hands of a few. Politicians with affluent backgrounds or strong networks often have financial security independent of office, reducing the need to prioritize public service. In Jammu & Kashmir, historical patterns of elite dominance and centralized power have reinforced this trend. While some leaders genuinely served the public, the overarching political culture rewarded personal ambition, privilege, and accumulation of wealth over civic duty. This context has created a perception of political office as a path to comfort, influence, and unchecked wealth, rather than a responsibility toward citizens.
“True democracy requires a shift from self-interest to selfless service. To ensure leaders prioritize public welfare over personal gain, society must implement structural reforms—such as pension changes and accountability mechanisms—while fostering a culture of transparency and civic engagement. Ultimately, a leader’s success should be measured by their impact on the community and the trust they build, rather than the wealth they accumulate.”
Erosion Of Public Trust: Self-serving leadership erodes public trust. Citizens quickly notice when leaders prioritize personal comfort and wealth accumulation over public welfare. Corruption, double pensions, luxurious lifestyles, and unchecked property ownership undermine credibility and foster cynicism, disengagement, and disillusionment. Public trust is the foundation of democracy. Without confidence that leaders act in citizens’ interest, participation declines, accountability weakens, and governance becomes ineffective. Leaders who “live for themselves” damage not only citizens’ lives but the democratic system itself.
Cooperative Perspective: Globally, leaders who exploit office for personal gain face scrutiny. Countries with robust systems implement checks and balances to prevent conflicts of interest, misuse of public funds, and unchecked accumulation of wealth. Transparency, independent audits, and citizen oversight act as deterrents. In many parts of India, however, loopholes, weak enforcement, and political culture allow leaders to benefit from state resources with minimal scrutiny. While some reforms exist, much remains to be done to prevent accumulation of wealth without accountability.
Steps Towards Reform: Reforming self-serving politics requires systemic change, citizen vigilance, and political will:
1. Regulating Pensions, Perks: Prevent double pensions and overlapping benefits.
2. Strengthening Accountability: Independent audits and anti-corruption bodies to monitor misuse of public funds.
3. Transparency: Public disclosure of salaries, allowances, perks, pensions, and personal assets.
4. Electoral Reforms: Reduce influence of money and networks to prioritize competence over privilege.
5. Civic Engagement: Citizens must demand accountability, recognize self-serving behavior, and elect leaders committed to public welfare.
The Role Of Media And Public Debate: Media and public discourse are critical in exposing misuse of public resources, unchecked accumulation of wealth, and luxurious lifestyles. Investigative journalism, opinion columns, and citizen campaigns bring attention to governance failures and unethical practices. Social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube allow citizens to directly engage with political commentary and hold leaders accountable. Visibility and scrutiny are essential for shaping a culture where politics serves the people, not the self.
Why Politics Must Serve The People: Public office is a responsibility, not a reward. Leaders entrusted with authority and resources must prioritize improving citizens’ lives. Exploiting office for personal gain undermines governance, weakens institutions, and erodes trust. Self-serving leadership has consequences beyond financial misuse. Democracy suffers, public institutions weaken, and civic service is devalued. True legacy lies not in wealth or properties amassed, but in tangible improvements, strengthened systems, and public trust earned through service.
Conclusion: The practice of politicians enjoying state resources while accumulating wealth, properties, and privileges with no accountability highlights a critical governance challenge. Double pensions, perks, and unchecked property ownership exemplify systemic exploitation of public funds, where leaders prioritize self-interest over public welfare. Democracy thrives only when political office is a platform for service, not self-service. Pension reforms, accountability mechanisms, civic engagement, and cultural shifts in political norms are essential. Citizens must demand transparency, recognize self-serving behavior, and elect leaders committed to public welfare. Ultimately, politics must serve the people, not the self. Leaders’ legacy will be measured not by the wealth or properties they accumulate, but by the lives they improve and the trust they earn. Power must serve the people, not the self.
(The author a national TV debate panelist is a freelancer. The views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this article are those of the author and aren’t necessarily in accord with the views of “Kashmir Horizon”)
[email protected]
