Question

Which of the following statements are correct regarding the Anti-Defection Law under the 52nd Constitutional Amendment?

1. A nominated member is disqualified if they join a political party after six months of taking their seat in the House.

2. The disqualification of a member for defection is decided by the presiding officer of the House, and this decision is final.

3. An independent member is disqualified if they join a political party after their election.

• A. 1 and 3
• B. 1 and 2
• C. 2 and 3
• D. All are correct

Answer 1

Answer:

A. 1 and 3

Anti-Defection Law

• The Anti-Defection Law was introduced in India to curb the problem of political defections, which were causing instability in governments.

• It was enacted through the 52nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1985, adding the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution.

• The primary objective of this law is to prevent members of Parliament and State Legislatures from changing political parties for personal gain or political expediency, thereby ensuring the stability of governments.

Grounds for Disqualification under the Anti-Defection Law

• A member elected on a ticket of a political party is disqualified if they voluntarily give up membership of their political party.

• A member is also disqualified if they vote or abstain from voting in the House contrary to any direction (whip) issued by their political party, unless they have obtained prior permission or their act has been condoned by the party within 15 days.

• Regarding nominated members: A nominated member is disqualified if they join any political party after the expiry of six months from the date on which they take their seat in the House. This means they have a six-month window to decide if they want to join a party without facing disqualification.

• Regarding independent members: An independent member (elected without being sponsored by any political party) is disqualified if they join any political party after their election. They are expected to remain independent.

Decision on Disqualification and Judicial Review

• The question of disqualification under the Tenth Schedule is decided by the Presiding Officer of the House (the Speaker in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies, and the Chairman in the Rajya Sabha).

• Initially, the decision of the Presiding Officer was considered final and not subject to judicial review. However, in the landmark case of Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992), the Supreme Court ruled that the decision of the Presiding Officer is subject to judicial review. This means courts can examine the decision, ensuring fairness and adherence to legal principles.

Key Amendments and Exceptions

• The 91st Constitutional Amendment Act of 2003 made significant changes to the Anti-Defection Law. It removed the provision that allowed a 'split' (where one-third members breaking away from a party were exempt from disqualification).

• Currently, the only exception to disqualification is when a political party merges with another party, provided that two-thirds of the members of the legislative party agree to such a merger.

• The 91st Amendment also specified that a defector is barred from holding any remunerative political post (like a ministerial position) until re-elected.