Disqualification of MLAs under anti-defection law
Context:
Jharkhand Assembly Speaker’s Tribunal disqualified JMM MLA Lobin Hembrom and BJP MLA J.P. Patel under the anti-defection law, effective from July 26, 2024.
- Reason for Disqualification: Both MLAs were found guilty of defection under the 10th Schedule of the Constitution for contesting Lok Sabha elections against their party’s wishes.
Relevance:
GS02 (Polity)
About:
- The anti-defection law aims to penalize individual Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) who switch from one party to another.
- Introduced as the Tenth Schedule in the Constitution by the 52nd Amendment Act in 1985, it was designed to bring stability to governments by discouraging party-switching among legislators.
- The law sets provisions for the disqualification of elected members on the grounds of defection, a response to the frequent toppling of state governments by party-hopping MLAs after the 1967 general elections.
Group Defections:
- While the anti-defection law penalizes individual defectors, it allows a group of MPs or MLAs to merge with another political party without facing disqualification.
- Initially, the 1985 Act considered a ‘defection’ by one-third of the elected members of a party as a ‘merger’. However, the 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003, amended this, now requiring at least two-thirds of the members of a party to favor a merger for it to be legally valid.
- Disqualified members can still run for elections from any political party for a seat in the same House.
Decision-Making:
- Decisions regarding disqualification due to defection are referred to the Chairman or Speaker of the respective House, and these decisions are subject to judicial review.
- The law does not specify a timeframe within which the presiding officer must decide a defection case.
Grounds for Defection:
- Voluntary Resignation: If an elected member voluntarily resigns from their political party.
- Voting Violations: If a member votes or abstains from voting contrary to the directives of their political party without prior permission.
- Independently Elected Members: If an independently elected member joins any political party.
- Nominated Members: If a nominated member joins any political party after six months from their nomination.
How Defection Impacts the Political System:
- Undermining Electoral Mandates: Defection occurs when legislators elected under one party’s banner switch allegiance to another, often driven by personal gain or political incentives such as ministerial positions.
- Disruption of Government Functioning: Historically, defection has led to governmental instability, as seen in the era of the “Aaya Ram, Gaya Ram” slogan, where frequent party-switching hindered effective governance.
- Encouraging Unethical Practices: Defection fosters unethical practices like horse-trading, where legislators are traded or bribed to switch sides, undermining the democratic process.
Challenges with Anti-Defection Law:
- Ambiguity in Paragraph 4: The law’s Paragraph 4 permits the merger of parties without loss of seats, but lacks clarity on whether this applies nationally or regionally, leading to confusion.
- Erosion of Democratic Values: The law curtails the independence of MPs and MLAs, mandating allegiance to party directives over personal judgment, thereby weakening the principle of representative democracy.
- Controversial Speaker Role: There is no specified timeline for the Speaker’s action in anti-defection cases, leading to delays and uncertainty, undermining the law’s effectiveness.
- Absence of Split Recognition: While the law allows for mergers, it fails to recognize splits within a party, perpetuating loopholes that facilitate wholesale defections.
- Impact on Debate and Discussion: The law prioritizes party loyalty over meaningful debate and discussion, fostering a culture of numerical dominance rather than intellectual discourse in parliamentary proceedings