Explanation:

Politicians should have some minimum educational qualification. Persons can not read files should not be ministers. What is your comment?

In every sector of the society, some basic qualifications are needed before entry of such sectors.

Politicians become powerful administrators after winning elections. Then they need basic knowledge and education to perform the works.

A minister having no capability to read and understand files may be unable to take proper decisions on regular basis. It is not good for the country, but common in many developing countries.

Do you think there should be some minimum barrier for qualification (say - graduation) before competing in elections?

Explanation:

In a democracy each and every individual has the right to vote (after aged 18 or 21) and no vote counts more than the other. Even though people are of course not equal (no equal opportunities and such), when it comes to law and political participation the vote of a poor person counts as much as that of one who is rich, the vote of a woman as much as that of a man and that of an uneducated as much as that of an educated person. Intelligence of a person might be supported by education and education might come with wealth and social status of family, but that does not mean that those who were not able to finance higher education are less intelligent and capable than those that enjoyed it, it is often the other way around.

The same goes for chances to be elected. How could you deny people who by chance had no way to get a higher education the right to be elected? If only the rich and those of social high standing were elected it would defeat the purpose of a democracy.

Now let us assume a person had been elected who had not enjoyed higher education, who might have been a plumber or bookseller or maybe a simple worker. They had not studied law or politics, but they had not only been voted into office by academics either. Isn't it the right of the people to vote somebody to represent themselves who actually represents themselves?

Now this person is in office: he will have a number of assistants and advisors to his disposal. From now on it is just a matter of letting them do their job, asking the right questions and listening to their input and be willing to be open-minded and learn. There are, however, people who do not have these traits, who refuse to listen, who surround themselves with others who are less capable than themselves in order to feel superior and there might even be highly educated people who had been elected but since they can not possibly know all they need to know they should listen to their advisors who were working the topic every day. But still they might refuse and not listen and make their own decisions based on feelings and impressions.

This might happen even with highly educated people. We just have to accept that and let democracy work it's magic. There are hundreds of people being elected into parliament and one has to hope that most of those are not complete ignorant idiots. There might be single cases where it happens, but within the grand scope of things we should be fine. There is always a bad apple in a box. It would be nice if they were all good, but that does not spoil the whole box. We are just in trouble if people decide to elect the most incapable, narrow-minded and ignorant person, but that too is the right of the people within a democracy.

As Winston Churchill once said, Democracy is by no means the best form of government, but it is the best we came up with so far. We just have to live with its' shortcomings.