PRABHAKAR TIMBLE
The rationale of the anti-defection law as can be drawn from the Parliamentary debates is the prevention of MLA trading. The Supreme Court has held that the object is to curb the evil of political defections motivated by lure of office and other similar considerations. To circumvent the provisions of the Tenth Schedule, political parties in power are hatching resignations of freshly elected MLAs/MPs and offering them plum ministerial berths or public offices to put them in a winnable position whilst facing re-elections. Though an unworthy trend, there is little axe to grind as the resigned MLAs have to face the wrath of voters and take the fresh mandate. Such MLAs cannot be referred to as defectors and they incur no disqualification. At the most, they can be labelled as opportunists and untrustworthy. However, they pay the price of political speculation by sacrificing their coveted seat and bear the risk of being either accepted or rejected by the electorate. At the same time, they are in an advantageous position in the electoral field being the foster kids of the political party in power.
The tiny state of Goa has never lagged behind in tearing the anti-defection law into tatters since its introduction by the 52nd amendment (1985). Goa has been the repository of defections of all shades including the Speaker defecting. Following the 91st amendment to the Constitution (2003), the 2004 by-election to the constituency of Poinguinim (Goa) was the first attempt in the country to make an ass of the spirit of the renovated anti-defection law. Isidore Fernandes, the Congress MLA in the Goa assembly, resigned and re-contested on BJP ticket and defeated the Congress candidate. He repeated a similar coup in a span of eight months by a turnaround to the Congress but lost to the BJP rival. After being elected as Congress candidate in 2017, he is now a part of the most recent group of ten Congress MLAs to merge into the BJP. Goa has the distinction of the shortest tenure Congress MLA in Vishwajit Pratapsingh Rane who resigned in less than 72 hours after being declared as elected from Valpoi constituency (2017) and was immediately sworn in as Cabinet minister after joining the BJP. On an earlier occasion, he had resigned as an independent MLA (2010) to contest a by-election from Valpoi constituency as a Congress candidate. In 2019, two by-elections were necessitated due to the resignations of Dayanand Sopte (Mandrem) and Subhash Shirodkar (Shiroda) who switched from the Congress and got re-elected as BJP MLAs from respective constituencies. The resignation of Sidharth Sripad Kuncalienkar as Panaji MLA (2017) stands apart as it was to allow former Goa Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar to contest the seat.
Now, it looks that the BJP is making repetitive use of this Goa legacy of resignations in every possible state to destabilise governments of rival parties. The Karnataka crisis with resignations of over 15 rebel MLAs from Congress/JDS is the political artwork of BJP State president B S Yeddyurappa. The cross over through the resignation route of elected representatives from rival parties to BJP is pregnant in West Bengal, Gujarat, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. The pace, ease and self-confidence with which the BJP designs resignations and mergers reminds me of the crime novel, The Godfather. Here, the story is of a fictional mafia family and an imaginary underworld whereas what is happening in state legislatures is real and not illusory. It is as if democratic politics has gone under the control of a political underworld where living men of flesh and blood make and accept offers which none can refuse. It is difficult to believe that within the BJP there is an organised syndicate which has made an unimaginable great fortune which is siphoned to break the faith and confidence of the people in parliamentary democracy.
On the surface, resignations of MLAs could look as no evil. This is largely because the MLAs seek re-election and provide the opportunity to the electorate of authentication. Switching of parties could be also viewed as recognition of the right of dissent and choice. Such happenings may be explained by lack of intra-party discussion and parties turning dictatorial. If such are the roots of resignations of MLAs, they are healthy and in right democratic spirit. However, none of the resignations can be attributed to any public causes or democratic ideals. Politicians in power are seen jabbering that resignations are unconditional. This chatter is immediately followed by grant of Ministerships and other prized public offices to the resigned MLAs. The unseen grant of cash component sends tremors in the minds of the general public. All this builds up the perception that representative democracy is a shady form of
government.
It was considered that the 91st amendment bringing in a modified Tenth Schedule had tightened the screws of defection as compared to the law enacted in 1985. With the deletion of the provision of one-third split of legislators belonging to a political party, it appeared that the anti-defection law is made draconian and defections a rarity. Our enterprising politicians innovated the ‘jugaad’, and the BJP today blessed with purse and governors is increasingly using the technique of resignations. The abuse of the provision of merger of a political party without any split or organisational quake or voiced dissent whatsoever in the political party and a plying Speaker acting within seconds on a one page declaration by group of MLAs are defeating the purpose of the anti-defection law. The provision of merger was inserted in the Tenth Schedule to provide for genuine dissent resulting in splits in political parties and the consequent need to grant protection to the elected representatives. It was to save the MLAs from disqualification in case of splits or mergers of political parties and not for MLAs to engineer split and call it merger. A determination by the higher judiciary should settle the misuse of the provision.
