Gist of Editorials: Lies and Loopholes | GS – II


Relevance :  GS Paper  II


Theme of the Article

Non-disclosure of information and filing of falsities in election affidavits can’t be treated equally.

Why has this issue cropped up?

Recently, a PIL was filed in the Supreme Court against PM Modi for filing a false affidavit.

The Concern

  • We are yet to see any strict action taken in this regard.
  • Hence, it is important to look into RPA and examine its effectiveness.

The RPA

  • RPA mandates all candidates to furnish basic information.
  • Failure to furnish information or filing false information is a penal offence..
  • However, it does not result in disqualification of candidate.
  • Further, it disqualifies any candidate found guilty of corrupt practice from contesting the election.
  • Courts’ silent stance has led to the understanding that filing false information does not amount to corrupt practice.

Supreme Court Verdicts

  • In Krishnamoorthy v. Sivakumar&Ors (2015), the court ruled that the voter has right to know the candidate.
  • InLokPrahari v. Union of India &Ors (2018), the court held that non-disclosure of information, is a corrupt practice.

Failure of the Supreme Court

  • A petition was filed in the SC in 2018 seeking declaration of the filing of false affidavits a corrupt practice. However, SC expressed its inability to direct a relevant legislation.

Way forward

  • It is high time the SC clarifies that filing false affidavits constitutes a “corrupt practice”
  • Increase the punishment under Section 125-A to a minimum of two years;
  • Conviction underSection 125-Ashould be a ground for disqualification of candidates.

Conclusion

Changes are needed to ensure that the voter’s right to information remains paramount, and the candidate’s constitutional right to contest is subservient to it.


 

Leave a Reply