Opinion - Editorials   

Curbing en bloc defections

NOTHING ILLUSTRATES THE abject failure of the anti-defection provisions of the Tenth Schedule better than the fact that they have encouraged the very thing they were supposed to hinder. The statistics on political defections unequivocally show that there have been more defections a year after the anti-defection laws came into force than before. The provisions of the Tenth Schedule have made individual defections of legislators very uncommon, in fact almost non-existent. What they have done, however, is to promote en bloc defections — which take place in the guise of splits and which are invariably richly rewarded by those who engineer them. Against this background, there has been a widely recognised need to amend the anti-defection law in a manner that not only strengthens the stability of Governments but also makes it serve the very purpose of its introduction and existence — discourage unprincipled defections.

The Union Cabinet's decision to amend the anti-defection Act, by scrapping the clause that permits defection if such defection constitutes a split (makes up one-third of legislative party strength), is broadly in line with the recommendation of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC). As a result, all those who defect, whether individually or in groups, will be disqualified from retaining their parliamentary or assembly seats and, in the event of seeking re-election, must contest on a new symbol. Similar measures are in place in other countries and are based on the broad principle that switching loyalties must incur disqualification as it alters the very basis on which legislators have been elected. Going by the briefing of the Cabinet spokesperson, the proposed anti-defection law amendment will not include an extremely significant NCRWC recommendation — namely that the power to settle questions of disqualification on grounds of defection should be taken away from the Speaker of the House and be vested with the Election Commission. Recent legislative history is littered with examples of the extremely partisan behaviour of Speakers when it comes to interpreting and applying the anti-defection law and it would be a shame if this recommendation goes disregarded.

Another significant Constitutional amendment aims at curbing the proliferation of jumbo Ministries by specifying the number of Ministers must not exceed 10 per cent of the total strength of a House. Article 239 AA of the Constitution, which relates to special provisions with respect to Delhi, lays down that the Capital's legislative assembly will follow the 10 per cent rule — an existing acknowledgement of the importance of keeping the size of Ministries in check and disallowing ministerial berths to be held out as sops to silence dissent and keep creaky coalitions together. Going by the Centre's announcement, the proposed amendment will vary from the recommendation of the NCRWC in a critical respect. The Commission had recommended that the number of Ministers in the Union Government or any State Government be fixed at 10 per cent of the total strength of the popular House of the legislature.

Inexplicably, the Cabinet has thought it fit to adopt this rule with respect to States but ignored it at the level of the Centre. As a result, with the exception of certain small States, the 10 per cent cap will apply irrespective of whether they have unicameral or bicameral legislatures. In contrast, the Council of Ministers at the Centre may be as large as 10 per cent of the total strength of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. There is no rational basis for this distinction between States and the Centre and the only apparent reason for making it is unflattering. The Vajpayee Government was sworn in with a jumbo 70-strong Council of Ministers, well over 10 per cent of the Lok Sabha strength, and has grown by a few since then. Jumbo Ministries need to be restricted but one of the ironies of this move is that a Government that suffers from this very problem is spearheading it.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |

Stories in this Section

• Curbing en bloc defections
• Unilateral U.S.
• The FDI policy
• Obscuring the reality
• Welcome move
• 'POTA is necessary'
• Not genuine
• Lesser holidays
• Late Dr. Varadarajan

Copyright © 2003, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu