A TRAVESTY OF ETHICS IN INDIAN POLITICS
There is no concerted
attempt by anybody
To put an end to defections
Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao
The Hans India
(21-07-2024)
{Instead of
individual sporadic defections, for sake of principles, mass defections are
being deliberately encouraged by ruling parties. The decision on
disqualification is vested in the Speaker who is invariably a member or nominee
of the ruling party and as a ‘YES PERSON’ he or she favors it. There is an
apprehension in political circles that NDA has discreet plans to orchestrate
defections, (BRS to BJP, and Congress to TDP) taking shelter under
anti-defection law of ‘Two Thirds Members Clause’ to form separate groups for
merger, and reach the ‘Magic Figure’ to form the AP-type TDP-BJP alliance
government in Telangana}-By Editor Hans India
Despite the
theoretically and ridiculously stringent ‘Anti-Defection Law,’ there has
been unabated spree of floor crossings by the Legislators in Telangana,. This peculiar
phenomenon of changing loyalties overnight, from ‘Opposition to Position,’
a routine affair of late, though unethical, forms part of shrewd politicking,
according to analysts. Nonetheless, the entire dramatics is only ‘One of Degree
not of Kind.’ Criticism by gainer or loser, should be taken with a ‘Pinch
of salt.’
Legislators on
defection, say that they would like to work under the leadership of CM Revanth
Reddy, similar to statements during the tenure of former CM K Chandrashekhar
Rao, when TDP, Congress Legislators, and lone CPI Member, shifted loyalties. Everyone
who changed party, then or now, (Maybe in future?) confess that, reasons
for switching allegiances has been due to their fascination with Chief
Minister, his welfare and development schemes, not to speak of their ‘Constituency
Development.’ The popular Self-Deprecating Phrase, ‘Do as I say, not as
I do’ is exactly apt in this characteristic ‘Telangana Defections Model’!
Except a ‘Blame Game,’
none of the ‘Tall Talking’ political leaders made any concerted attempt to
put an end to this ‘Necessary Evil or Malice.’ Identifying similarities and
dissimilarities amongst ‘politics, politicking, ethics, principles, acts,
legality, and conventions’ in the context of defections, requires a clear
understanding of each concept's nuances. It involves detailed complex analysis
of the whole gamut. For instance, political decisions must be evaluated in the
context of ethical implications, legality, adherence to principles, and
conformity to conventions, case by case.
If
Politics (Whether it is Task or Game?) encompasses the broader scope,
Politicking implies manipulative or self-serving behavior within the political
arena. Ethics is broader but Principles are specific fundamental beliefs that
guide actions, but both deal with moral standards and guide behavior. Acts are Specific
Legislative Decisions, while Legality refers to the broader concept of
adherence to the law, but both relate to the Law and Governance. Conventions,
most important of all the above are the ‘Established Customs or Practices,’
often informal and based on tradition or general agreement. In democracy,
discipline with combination of all the above is indispensable.
The Genesis of
largescale defections leading to Anti-Defection Law, at a later stage, had its
own inevitability. In 1967 elections Congress lost in eight states resulting in
formation of coalition governments, provoking defections. 32 state governments
collapsed between 1967-71 due to defections, 1969 in state legislatures and
also 142 in Parliament. 212 defectors were rewarded with ministerial berths!!! In
tune with public opinion, ‘Anti-Defection Law’ the 52nd Amendment,
as Tenth Schedule to the Constitution, was passed in 1985 during Rajiv Gandhi
regime. Later 91st Amendment in 2003 made some changes. The Law, however,
has been circumvented effortlessly.
For instance, in the
event of ‘Two Thirds Members of Legislature’ elected on the symbol of
one Party decide to form a separate group and approach the Speaker or Chairman,
as the case may be, to recognize them for merger with another Party, there is
no alternative except to concede their request. Which means, instead of
Individual Sporadic Defections, ruling ones especially, are deliberately encouraging
Calculated, and well-Planned Mass Defections by way of Shrewd Politicking!!!
In the British Parliament,
the House of Commons, the Mother of Parliamentary Democracies, whoever crosses
the floor after getting elected from one party is called as disloyal person.
Though infrequent, defections do take place there occasionally. Members of the
House of Commons of United Kingdom, British Members of European Parliament, and
Members of the British Devolved Assemblies, sometimes cross the floor and
abandon previous party membership. For instance, in 1931, Prime Minister James
Ramsay MacDonald representing Labor Party defected, following differences with
his party leadership on the then prevailing national economic crisis. But, neither
he nor three of his cabinet colleagues who left party with him did not resign
to the membership of House of Commons. There was no necessity also. Elections
were also not held. Nevertheless, principles guided defections there.
There are judgments on
disqualification of Members and the Tenth Schedule by Supreme Court from time
to time. The Court commented that, whether the right to freedom of speech and
expression is curtailed by the Tenth Schedule, whether the provisions do not
subvert the democratic rights of elected members in Parliament and State Legislatures.
On several other issues the Court observed that, once a member is expelled, he or
she is treated as an ‘Unattached’ member in the house, but continues to
be Member of the old party as per the Tenth Schedule. However, on joining new
party after being expelled, he or she amounts to have voluntarily given up
membership of old party.
The Anti-Defection Law provides
stability to the government by preventing frequent unethical shifts of
party allegiance, ensures that candidates elected with one party support and on
the basis of party manifestoes remain loyal to the party policies. It also
promotes party discipline. The other way to look at is, by preventing
parliamentarians from changing parties, it reduces the accountability of the
government to the Parliament, Legislatures, and the People. It interferes with
the member’s freedom of speech and expression by curbing dissent against his party
policies.
In the report ‘Ethics
in Governance’ of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission, it is observed
that ‘Defection has long been a malaise of Indian political life. It
represents manipulation of the political system for furthering private
interests, and has been a potent source of political corruption.’ The
report further observed that ‘there is no doubt that permitting defection in
any form or context is a travesty of ethics in politics.’
The decision on
disqualification is vested in the Speaker who is invariably the member or
nominee of the ruling party and as an ‘YES PERSON’ he or she
favors it. Hence the suggestion is, that, the deciding authority should be an
autonomous body like Election Commission. The National Commission to
Review the Working of the Constitution recommended that ‘the power to decide
on questions of disqualification on ground of defection should vest in the
Election Commission instead of in the Chairman or Speaker.’ The Election
Commission and Ethics in Governance report in slight modification recommended
that the issue of disqualification on grounds of defection should be decided by
the President or the Governor under the advice of the Election Commission,
instead of relying on the biased objectivity of the decision from the Speaker.
Fundamental object of
Anti-defection law is to put an end to the malady of ‘Unprincipled’
defections, but, at the same time, providing scope for realignment of forces by
way of merger and split of political parties on ideological tie-ups may be
acceptable on case by case and in the interest of state. It is not correct to brand
all defections on the same footing. Though interpretations vary on the
Anti-Defection Law, one thing certain is, that, there is a conspicuous absence
of ‘Well-Established Conventions’ required in a Parliamentary Democracy and
more so in India. That way all political parties failed in establishing
conventions.
Meanwhile, there is an
apprehension in political circles that, NDA has discreet plans to orchestrate
defections, (BRS to BJP, and Congress to TDP) taking shelter under
Anti-Defection Law of ‘Two Thirds Members clause’ to form separate groups
for merger, and reach the ‘Magic Figure’ to form AP Model TDP-BJP
Alliance Government in Telangana. Can we construe that, showering praises by Bandi
Sanjay on Harish Rao as a subtle hint at merger of BRS with BJP? When KCR and
Revanth Reddy advantageously experimented this, why not NDA Leaders?
Albert Einstein rightly
said that ‘It is better to believe than to disbelieve; in doing you bring
everything to the realm of possibility’ means ‘Belief is Opportunity’
and ‘Disbelief limits Opportunities’!
(Writer
is a senior Independent Journalist and Analyst)
No comments:
Post a Comment