This article has been written by Akalya Shanmugam, a Final year student of Government Law College (Coimbatore),TamilNadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University.
The Tenth Schedule, also known as the Anti-Defection Law, was introduced in 1985 to address the problem of political defection. It lays down the process for disqualifying Members of Parliament or Members of Legislative Assembly who defect from their political party. The schedule was aimed at curbing political opportunism and encouraging stable governance by ensuring that elected representatives remain loyal to their party and its ideology.
However, over the years, the Tenth Schedule has been criticized for its impact on democracy and the party system. Some argue that it has become a tool for political parties to discipline their members and enforce loyalty, thereby discouraging dissent and debate. Others suggest that the law has failed to achieve its objectives and has instead resulted in a more fragmented and unstable political landscape.
This raises an important question – is the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution a myth or reality? This issue requires a deeper analysis of the schedule’s provisions, its implementation, and its impact on Indian democracy
The Tenth Schedule lays down the process for disqualifying members of a House if they voluntarily give up the membership of their political party or violate their party’s whip on a vote. The law is aimed at curbing political opportunism, promoting party loyalty, and ensuring stable governance. However, the law has been criticized for being draconian, anti-democratic, and stifling dissent and debate.
One of the significant criticisms of the Tenth Schedule is that it undermines the democratic process by forcing elected representatives to toe their party line, even if they disagree with their party’s views. This discourages dissent, debate and encourages political parties to become more autocratic and centralized. In the case of Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992), the Supreme Court held that the Anti-Defection Law strengthens political parties and promotes stability, which is necessary for democracy’s smooth functioning.
However, there have been instances where the Anti-Defection Law has been misused by political parties to undermine democracy. For example, in 2019, the Karnataka Legislative Assembly witnessed a controversial trust vote, where several lawmakers resigned from their party and were disqualified under the Tenth Schedule. The disqualification was challenged in the Supreme Court, which ruled that the Speaker’s decision was valid but held that the lawmakers’ disqualification was invalid as it was based on their alleged defiance of their party whip.
Here are some relevant case laws related to the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution:
Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu and Others (1992) – The Supreme Court held that the Anti-Defection Law was a reasonable restriction on the right to freedom of speech and expression of an elected representative. The court also observed that the law strengthened political parties and promoted stability, which is necessary for democracy’s smooth functioning.
Rajendra Singh Rana v. Swami Prasad Maurya (2007) – The Supreme Court held that a split in a political party, resulting in the formation of a new political party, would not attract disqualification under the Anti-Defection Law. The court held that only those who left the original party and joined the new party would be disqualified.
P. A. Sangma v. Tenth Schedule Monitoring Committee (2011) – The Supreme Court held that the Speaker’s decision to disqualify a member under the Anti-Defection Law could be subject to judicial review. The court held that the Speaker’s decision was not immune from judicial scrutiny and could be challenged on the grounds of mala fides, perversity, or violation of natural justice.
G. Vishwanathan v. Speaker, Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly (2016) – The Supreme Court held that the Speaker’s decision to disqualify a member under the Anti-Defection Law should be made within a reasonable time. The court held that the delay in deciding a disqualification petition would violate the rights of the affected member and undermine the democratic process.
These case laws highlight the Supreme Court’s role in interpreting and applying the provisions of the Tenth Schedule. The court has laid down several principles and guidelines to prevent the misuse of the law and ensure that it is used only in genuine cases of defection. However, the efficacy of the law in curbing political defection remains a subject of debate, and its impact on democracy remains a contentious issue.
In conclusion, the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, also known as the Anti-Defection Law, is a reality and has been used to prevent political defections and promote political stability. While the law has been criticized for stifling dissent and debate, the Supreme Court has upheld its provisions and has laid down guidelines to prevent its misuse. The law’s impact on democracy remains a contentious issue, with concerns about its impact on democratic values such as dissent, debate, and accountability. The challenge is to strike a balance between ensuring political stability and preserving democratic values. Therefore, there is a need to reform and refine the law to ensure that it is used judiciously and only in genuine cases of defection
REFERENCES:
1.Indian Constitutional Law, M.P. Jain, LexisNexis Publication.
2.Introduction to the Constitution of India, Dr. Durga Das Basu, 20th Edition Reprint 2011, LexisNexis Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur Publication.
3.Constitutional Law, Mamta Rao, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow
4.Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu and Others, 1992 AIR 604, 1992 SCR (1) 686 – https://indiankanoon.org/doc/689086/
5.Rajendra Singh Rana v. Swami Prasad Maurya, (2007) 4 SCC 270 – https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1538223/
6.P. A. Sangma v. Tenth Schedule Monitoring Committee, (2011) 2 SCC 386 – https://indiankanoon.org/doc/2065210/7
7.G. Vishwanathan v. Speaker, Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, (2016) 7 SCC 353 – https://indiankanoon.org/doc/144163046/
8.”Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India,” PRS Legislative Research, 9 Mar. 2018, https://www.prsindia.org/content/tenth-schedule-constitution-india
Aishwarya Says:
Law students often face problems, which they cannot share with their friends and families. We have started a column on our website Student’s Corner. In this column we are talking to several law students about the challenges that they face. Students who are interested in participating in the same, can fill this Google Form.
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE SAME, DO LET ME KNOW.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems to aishwarya@aishwaryasandeep.com
Join our Whatsapp Group for latest Job Opening