Relevance: GS Paper II (Polity & Governance)
Why has this issue cropped up?
One had hoped that the judiciary would show the way forward with regard to preventing candidates facing criminal charges from contesting elections, but in a recent judgment, the Supreme Court has left it to Parliament to legislate on the subject.
Basis of such an expectation from judiciary
- The expectation was not unreasonable, as some important changes in the electoral laws were made mandatory by the judiciary. For example,
- making it mandatory for candidates to submit an affidavit with full disclosure of criminal cases, if any, and details of their asset and income.
- providing an option to voters to exercise None of the Above (NOTA) in case they do not want to vote for any of the candidate contesting an election.
Stand of the Court
- The court mentioned that it was not within its powers to disqualify politicians facing criminal cases from contesting election, but recommended that Parliament enact a strong law.
- However, the court made it mandatory for political parties and candidates themselves to make public disclosure through print and electronic media.
Probable outcome of the court’s stand
- There is serious doubt whether this judgment would in any way help in making our politics cleaner than before. The chances of Parliament acting fast on this issue are dim.
- The reasons are simple and obvious. No political party is free of this problem. The use of muscle power along with money power is a weapon used by all political parties to maximise electoral gains.
- In such a scenario, any move to ban candidates with a criminal record from contesting elections would mean political parties inflicting self-harm.
The extent of criminalisation of politics
- Data indicate that 179 out of the 543 elected Members of Parliament in the present Lok Sabha have some kind of criminal case pending against them.
- While it is true that some of these may be of a frivolous nature, it is also true that many of these cases concern allegations of their involvement in serious crimes.
- In the case of over 100 MPs, the cases were of a very serious nature such as crimes against women and kidnapping.
- There seems to be very little improvement in this regard in the last five years. In the previous Lok Sabha (2009), 163 had criminal cases pending against them, many of which were of a serious nature.
- The profile of members of the Upper House is no better; of 228 members of the Rajya Sabha for whom data could be analysed, 20 have cases of serious crimes pending against them.
No effort by political parties
While political parties raise concern about candidates with a tainted background contesting elections and getting elected, none of them come forward to set an example for others when it is time to act. There is hardly any difference between the national and regional parties in this regard.
The gravity of the issue
- The issue is far more important and serious than the attention being paid to it by the policy makers.
- While the Election Commission has limited powers to legislate on such laws, it is only Parliament which can legislate to bring about the desired change.
- Public opinion too is not firm on this. For example, a survey found that opinion was divided when people were asked whether they would be willing to vote for a honest candidate who may not get their work done, or a tainted candidate who could get their work done.
