The All-India Presiding Officers’ Conference (AIPOC) ended with the delegates failing to reach a consensus on whether the Speaker’s powers under the anti-defection law should be limited.

What is Anti-defection Law?

• The Anti-Defection Law under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution punishes MPs/ MLAs for defecting from their party by taking away their membership of the legislature.
• It gives the Speaker of the legislature the power to decide the outcome of defection proceedings.
• It was added to the Constitution through the Fifty-Second (Amendment) Act, 1985 when Rajiv Gandhi was PM.
• The law applies to both Parliament and state assemblies.

Cases considered under the anti-defection law

The law covers three scenarios with respect to shifting of political parties by an MP or an MLA.

(1) Voluntary give-up

• The first is when a member elected on the ticket of a political party “voluntarily gives up” membership of such a party or votes in the House against the wishes of the party.
• Such persons lose his seat.

(2) Independent members

• When a legislator who has won his or her seat as an independent candidate joins a political party after the election.
• In both these instances, the legislator loses the seat in the legislature on changing (or joining) a party.

(3) Nominated MPs

• In their case, the law gives them six months to join a political party, after being nominated.
• If they join a party after such time, they stand to lose their seat in the House.

Powers to disqualification

• Under the anti-defection law, the power to decide the disqualification of an MP or MLA rests with the presiding officer of the legislature.
• The law does not specify a time frame in which such a decision has to be made.
• As a result, Speakers of legislatures have sometimes acted very quickly or have delayed the decision for years — and have been accused of political bias in both situations.

Significant role of the Speaker/Presiding Officer

• Pandit Nehru had referred to the Speaker as “the symbol of the nation’s freedom and liberty” and emphasized that Speakers should be men of “outstanding ability and impartiality”.
• Several judgments on the anti-defection law have been rendered by the Supreme Court.
• A common factor that shows up in these rulings is the blatant, partisan conduct of speakers in state assemblies.

Reasons for Speakers’ bias

• The Speaker continues to belong to a particular political party.
• The electoral system and conventions in India have ‘not been developed to ensure protection to the office, there are cogent reasons for Speakers to retain party membership.
• It would be unrealistic to expect a speaker to completely abjure all party considerations while functioning.
• There are structural issues regarding the manner of appointment of the Speaker and her tenure in office.

Way forward

• Parliament may seriously consider a Constitutional amendment to bring in a permanent Tribunal for dealing with defection cases.
• It is suggested that a scheme should be brought wherein Speakers should renounce all political affiliations, membership, and activity once they have been elected.
• We can learn from the UK model. In practice, once elected, the Speaker gives up all-partisan affiliation, as in other Parliaments of British tradition.
• He/she remains in office until retirement, even though the majority may change and does not express any political views during debates.

Conclusion

• Impartiality, fairness, and autonomy in decision-making are the hallmarks of a robust institution.
• It is the freedom from interference and pressures which provide the necessary atmosphere where one can work with an absolute commitment to the cause of neutrality as a constitutional value.

UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now