Supreme Court to Hear Plea on Anti-Defection Law Interpretation
UPSC / SSC current affairs note · Polity
Why in news
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a plea by senior advocate Kapil Sibal seeking interpretation of the anti-defection law, particularly the merger provision under the Tenth Schedule. The court issued notice to the Centre, acknowledging significant issues with the current working of the Tenth Schedule. This could have major repercussions for India's political landscape by curbing illegal defections through party mergers.
Background
The anti-defection law is enshrined in the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, added by the 52nd Amendment Act, 1985. It provides for disqualification of legislators on grounds of defection, but paragraph 4 carves out an exception for mergers of political parties. The provision has been criticized for allowing bulk defections under the guise of merger, potentially altering electoral verdicts.
Key facts
The Supreme Court bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe issued notice to the Centre on a plea by Kapil Sibal for interpretation of the anti-defection law.
The court observed that there are 'enormous issues' with the working of the Tenth Schedule.
Kapil Sibal argued that electoral verdicts can be changed through the merger route, turning a majority into a minority and vice versa.
The petition cites instances of defection and subsequent merger of rebel MLAs and MPs, including those affecting Shiv Sena (UBT) and TMC after West Bengal elections.
Shiv Sena (UBT) has also moved a petition questioning the Lok Sabha Speaker's decision to allow merger of six of its nine MPs with the Eknath Shinde-led Sena faction.
Paragraph 4 of the Tenth Schedule provides that members are not disqualified if their parent party merges with another, or if they object and function as a separate group.
Merger is deemed to have taken place if not less than two-thirds of the members of the legislature party agree to such merger.
The court noted that the issue ought to be raised in Parliament, but Sibal submitted it would not be addressed there as it benefits those in power.
Prelims pointers
- Tenth Schedule of the Constitution (Anti-Defection Law)
- 52nd Amendment Act, 1985
- Paragraph 4 of Tenth Schedule (merger exception)
- Two-thirds majority requirement for deemed merger
- Supreme Court bench: Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe
- Kapil Sibal (senior advocate)
- Shiv Sena (UBT) faction
- Lok Sabha Speaker's role in merger decisions
Mains angles
- GS2 Polity: Discuss the effectiveness of the anti-defection law in preventing political defections and its impact on democratic stability.
- GS2 Polity: Critically examine the merger exception under the Tenth Schedule and its potential for misuse to circumvent disqualification.
- GS2 Polity: Analyze the role of the judiciary in interpreting constitutional provisions related to defection and party mergers.
- GS2 Polity: Evaluate the need for reforms in the anti-defection law to address loopholes and strengthen democratic accountability.