SC examines anti-defection law loophole on Kapil Sibal plea
UPSC / SSC current affairs note · Polity
Why in news
The Supreme Court issued a notice to the Centre on a PIL by Kapil Sibal challenging the anti-defection law's merger provisions. The bench noted 'enormous issues' with the law, as Sibal argued it allows electoral verdicts to be changed.
Background
The Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, added in 1985, provides for disqualification of legislators on grounds of defection. However, it includes an exception for mergers where two-thirds of a party's members agree to merge with another party.
Key facts
Supreme Court issued notice to Centre on PIL by Kapil Sibal challenging anti-defection law's merger provisions.
The bench noted 'enormous issues' with the law.
Sibal argued that the merger provision allows legislators to bypass anti-defection rules and change electoral verdicts.
The PIL questions the constitutional interpretation that permits such bypass.
The case is likely to examine the loophole in the Tenth Schedule regarding mergers.
Prelims pointers
- Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law) added by 52nd Amendment Act, 1985.
- Merger exception: If two-thirds of a party's legislators agree to merge, they are not disqualified.
- Kapil Sibal: Senior advocate and former Union Minister.
- Supreme Court: Apex judicial body in India.
Mains angles
- Discuss the effectiveness of the anti-defection law in preventing political defections.
- Critically examine the merger exception in the Tenth Schedule and its impact on democratic stability.
- Analyze the role of the judiciary in interpreting constitutional provisions related to defection.