1. Home
2. Opinion

POLITICAL POACHING TO GRAB POWER

Young Bites. Dated: 7/9/2020 11:08:27 AM

MAHADEEP SINGH JAMWAL With the framing of Constitution, India adopted the Westminster system of representative democracy in the formation of our legislatures. The leader who enjoys the majority support of the legislature is chosen as the head of the government. Time and again we have been witnessing turmoil in elected governments. Political crises are not contemporary phenomenon in India but part and parcel of the politicians shamelessly indulging in horse-trading to capture power. This is more distinguishable where the edge of seats is very thin and ruling party is on razor-thin majority. The luring of legislators with money forms the playing wicket for many of the defection cases. The acceptance of money by a legislator for doing any act on the floor of the house is deemed to be unethical. The political stability is essential for the progress of the country. The low profile people elected to the assemblies can very easily be poached by flash of currency bags and ministerial berths, to cross over, offered by the wicked political poachers, who can be christened as murderers of the democracy. The turncoats are more rapacious on gaining more political and monetary ascendancy. This is followed by whipping of shameless lawmakers by their party hawkers to be holed in five star accommodations and farm houses. The whisking of these elected representatives itself expose that these are not a loyal fraternity and have no real concern for the people who have elected them keeping in view the ideology and concern of the party they belong. The loyalty of the legislators is not first to the party that fielded them, but to the electorate of the constituency that elected them. After their election they disregard the mandate and frequently turn their coats according to their intimate prosperity. The term ‘Horse Trading’, worst cyclic game in the politics, owe its origin linked to a lawmaker from Haryana in 1967 elected as an independent candidate but with in a fortnight changed party thrice. The political instability contributed by large scale political defection was in fact a threat to democracy which many a time reduced the concept of democracy to a mockery. During late 1970s, we witnessed frequent shameful act of lawmakers in turning their coats that lead to formation of a committee on defection issue. As a result 32nd Constitution Amendment Bill introduced for disqualifying defected legislators lapsed with the dissolution of Lok Sabha. This attempt was followed by the 48th Constitution Amendment Bill with the same tenor and terms of the lapsed Bill. The loyalty of the legislators to the constituency is given primacy. It is curious to note that when the Constitution was originally adopted, the party system was not recognized by the Constituent Assembly. About cross over to other camp, after being elected, the Constitution was silent till this ‘Anti Defection Act’ came into formation. The only provision for disqualification for membership contained in Article 102 of the Constitution and it speaks of disqualification: if one holds office of profit, if of unsound mind, if disqualified by or under any law made by Parliament but there was no provision for disqualification on horse trading or defection till 1985, when ‘Anti- Defection Act’ was passed to prevent such defections and is contained in the tenth schedule of the Constitution, introduced by the 52nd amendment in 1985, applicable to both Parliament and State Assemblies. The evil of political defections has been a matter of national concern. If it is not combated, it is likely to undermine the very foundations of our democracy and the principles which sustain it, was the vision to legislate ‘Anti-Defection Act’. In the provision ‘Defection’ is defined as ‘to adopt a position or association, often to join an opposing group’. Grounds of defection are defined as either voluntarily giving up the membership of his party or disobeying (abstaining or voting against) the directives (political whip) of the party leadership on a vote in legislature. Many members seek to amend this law by saying that it's against people's wish as because they represent people's wish but the Constitution Bench, by a majority judgment, had held that unprincipled and unscrupulous political defections are to be contained and the legislators’ freedom of speech can be reasonably curtailed for the larger interest of the nation. Still we can say that ‘Anti-Defection Act’ is not fool proof as to deter legislators from cross over by way of horse trading as legislators can change their party without the risk of disqualification to merge with or into another party provided that at least two-thirds of the legislators (silent whether 2/3rd of the total legislators of the party or of the defecting legislatures) are in favor of the merger, neither the members who decide to merge, nor the ones who stay with the original party will face disqualification. The Supreme Court mandated that in the absence of a formal resignation, the giving up of membership can be determined by the conduct of a legislator, such as publicly expressing opposition to their party or support for another party, engaging in anti-party activities, criticizing the party on public forums on multiple occasions, and attending rallies organized by opposition parties. In pursuant to the directions by the Supreme Court of India, in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 536 of 2011, to make its suggestions on two specific issues, including ‘curbing criminalization of politics and needed law reforms’, the Law Commission of India in its 244th Report titled ‘Electoral Disqualification’ submitted to the Government of India on 24th February 2014, have recommended a suitable amendment to the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, which shall have the effect of vesting the power to decide on questions of disqualification on the ground of defection with the President or the Governor, as the case may be, (instead of the Speaker or the Chairman), who shall act on the advice of the ECI. This would help preserve the integrity of the Speaker’s office. It is only when intra-party democracy is statutorily ensured that the anti-defection law can gain meaning and political legitimacy. 999expo999@gmail.com