Video Editor: Mohd Irshad Alam
Contesting the elections from one party and later joining another party due to greed and money is called defection. Defection of politicians is very common in politics. It is to prevent these very acts that the anti-defection law was introduced in 1985.
But rules are meant to be broken.
Election after election, leaders have found loopholes in the law and now the court is urging the Parliament to rethink it.
The Supreme Court has passed a notable judgment about the disqualification of a defecting MLA or MP.
You must be wondering what the big deal is about defection, given that the court is being so strict.
Imagine you voted for a candidate from a particular party and he won the election. Now, for some reason, that party did not get the majority and this candidate defects to the winning party, a party which you didn't want to vote for. Isn't it a betrayal of your vote?
The same scenario can happen during voting on a particular issue in Parliament. An MP or MLA can ignore his party's instructions and vote to help the opposing party.
A bench comprising Justice RF Nariman, Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice V Ramasubramanian, when hearing a similar case, said that if any MP or MLA violates the anti-defection law (10th schedule of the Constitution), then he has no right to be in Parliament.
“The Speaker, in acting as a Tribunal under the Tenth Schedule, is bound to decide disqualification petitions within a reasonable period.”Supreme Court of India
You can understand the gravity of the situation through the following judgment by the court:
“The provisions of the 10th schedule are vital to the functioning of our democracy and should be given real teeth”
The bench said that only the Speaker has the power to retain or cancel membership.
Parliament now has to decide whether the Speaker, who himself is a member of a party, should be allowed to decide on membership or not.
So, if the Speaker cannot decide, who will? The court had some suggestions on that too:
“A permanent tribunal, headed by a retired SC judge or Chief Justice of an high court, or some independent mechanism be set up to solve such cases swiftly and impartially.”
The on-going case is in relation to Manipur. During the 2017 Manipur elections, D Shyamkumar Singh won using a Congress ticket. He later defected to the BJP, helped BJP form the government and became a minister in the Cabinet.
The Congress appealed to disqualify the minister but the Speaker never took a decision. The matter reached the Supreme Court after passing through the high court and, on 21 January, the court asked the Speaker to come to a decision within four weeks.
“Defection is a huge cause of corruption in politics and fixing it is very crucial,” the bench said, acknowledging the problem of speakers acting in a partisan manner due to their political loyalties.
Governments don't enjoy anyone interfering in the Speaker's decisions.
But the apex court can still order a judicial review of Speaker's decisions, which is considered a huge step towards safeguarding democracy.
The government will take advantage of the loopholes but we should not forget that no party can be in power forever. What you are using against the opposition today, can be used against you tomorrow.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)