Panel moots review of defection law

The government should take concrete measures for suitably amending the law, it suggested. The panel identified three controversial areas relating to the application of the law – time from which a split becomes operative, effecting splits for facilitating mergers and absence of provision of certain eventualities such as expulsions of members for political parties.

It said in an era of hung parliaments and assemblies, coalition and minority governments, there were more occasions when presiding officers were called upon to decide cases under theanti-defection law.

Under these circumstances, the need for removing various lacunae and suitably amending the tenth schedule has become more pronounced, it said. The most contentious provisions are those relating to splits and mergers, the panel pointed out, adding that one of the main areas of criticism of the law was that while individual defections are punished, collective defections are condoned in the name of splits.

It said the very concept of justification of a split on ideological differences and right of dissent were the issues of debate. In the decade-long operation of the anti-defection law, various lacunae and ambiguities have come to light which have been largely responsible for varied interpretation of its various provisions at the hands of presiding officers, the report said.

It also recommended comprehensive electoral reforms to check the incidence of criminalisation in the polity saying it was “eating into the very vitals of the democratic system”.

It said there was an urgent needfor corrective measures on the basis of all-party discussions and consensus and suitable modifications in the Representation of People Act.

“The matter may be deliberated upon in depth by all political parties which may come up with concrete proposals for rooting out this malaise from our political system,” the report said, adding that the very credibility of our democratic institutions is at stake due to criminalisation of politics.

On the proposed Lok Pal, the committee recommended that it may be empowered to deal only with the complaints which fall under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act. It also recommended that the committee of privileges be renamed as the committee on ethics and privileges.

It said since privileges, obligations and ethics were all interrelated it would be proper if these matters are dealt with by a single parliamentary committee.