-
28 Mar 2025
GS Paper 2
Polity & Governance
Day 23: “The practice of legislators from changing political parties during their term continues unabated in Indian legislatures despite the Tenth Schedule having been inserted into the Constitution.” In light of the above statement, critically analyze the Anti-defection of law and suggest measures to curb it. (38 Marks)
Approach
- Describe briefly the Tenth Schedule of the constitution.
- Chalk out the positive and negative impact of Anti-defection law.
- Suggest measures to curb it.
- Conclude suitably.
Introduction
The Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, introduced through the 52nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1985, aimed to address the issue of political defections by legislators. It was intended to preserve party discipline, ensure stability of governments, and uphold the sanctity of electoral mandates. However, the continued practice of defections and shifting alliances has raised serious questions about the effectiveness of the law in its current form.
Body
Positive Impact of the Anti-Defection Law
- Ensures Stability of Elected Governments: The law discourages indiscriminate floor-crossing, thus helping maintain the longevity of ruling coalitions.
- Encourages Party Cohesion: Legislators are expected to uphold the party’s policies and manifesto, reinforcing ideological alignment.
- Discourages Opportunistic Alliances: The law deters frequent shifts in allegiance for personal or political gain, which often undermine voter trust.
- Legal Basis for Disqualification: The Tenth Schedule provides a constitutional mechanism to disqualify defecting members, reducing the scope for unregulated political manoeuvring.
Challenges and Limitations in Implementation
- Limits Legislative Autonomy: Strict adherence to party lines curbs the freedom of speech and dissent among legislators, even on non-critical issues.
- Vagueness in Terminology: Phrases like “voluntarily giving up membership” are open to interpretation, creating ambiguity and legal disputes.
- Delay in Decision by Presiding Officers: The law does not specify a time frame for the Speaker or Chairman to decide disqualification cases, leading to indefinite delays.
- Example – Arunachal Pradesh (2016): A political crisis emerged after a group of MLAs shifted support, eventually leading to President’s Rule, even as disqualification petitions were pending.
- Unregulated Use of Merger Provision: The exemption from disqualification in cases where two-thirds members merge has been used to facilitate group defections without ideological justification.
- Example – Uttarakhand (2016): A political crisis involving defection led to the disqualification of nine MLAs, which was later upheld by the High Court.
- This highlighted the complexity of interpreting voluntary resignation and merger clauses.
- Presiding Officer's Discretion May Lack Neutrality: As the Presiding Officer is often a member of the ruling party, impartiality in decision-making can be compromised.
- Example – Bihar (2022): Changing political alliances in the Assembly raised concerns about defection in spirit, although formal disqualification did not occur.
Reform Measures to Strengthen the Law
- Time-Bound Decision-Making: Amend the law to mandate a specific time limit (e.g., 90 days) for ruling on disqualification cases.
- Transfer Decision Authority to Independent Body: As suggested by the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC), disqualification decisions should be made by the Election Commission, not the Speaker.
- Clarify Key Terms: Clearly define terms like "voluntarily giving up membership" to ensure legal certainty and consistency.
- Limit the Scope of Whip to Critical Issues: Disqualification should be restricted to core matters like confidence motions and budget bills, promoting intra-party debate.
- Reassess Merger Provisions: Exemptions based on ideological reasoning rather than numerical strength would reduce misuse of the merger clause.
Conclusion
The anti-defection law was introduced with the intent to uphold the integrity of the democratic process and ensure accountability of elected representatives. However, gaps in its implementation have allowed defections to continue in new forms. Addressing these challenges through legal clarity, institutional neutrality, and procedural reforms is essential to ensure the law aligns with the spirit of the Constitution and the expectations of a vibrant democracy.