ANTI-DEFECTION LAW

Defection is the process in which a member of a political party holding a seat in the house of parliament or legislature leaves that political party and joins other political parties. After the incident of Haryana where the phrase “Aaya Ram Gaya Ram” started when an MLA Gaya Lal changed his party thrice within the same day in 1967. The Anti-Defection law sought to prevent such future incidents.

Tenth Schedule of Constitution was added after the 52^nd Constitutional Amendment Act in 1985 which included Anti-Defection Law. Anti-defection law came into existence to disqualify the member who performs defection by the presiding officer Speaker of Parliament or Vice-Chairman of Legislature. This schedule contains various articles but there are two of them which are based on it. Article 102 and Article 191 which states about the disqualification of a member from the parliament or legislature on the ground of defection, it also included the speaking against the party or voting against the party to which a member begins. But this law contained that one-third member leaving together will not lead to disqualification.

It only disqualified on the basis of one member defection so it contained loophole, for the same members started leaving the party in a one-third ratio of the total members together at a party. This again led to some amendments in the law, so by 91^st Constitutional Act which added Article 102 (2) which stated that two-thirds of members wanted a merger with other parties then it will not lead to disqualification.  Still, there are many flaws like the power to the presiding officer who mostly belongs to the ruling party which can lead to some disfunction, they can hold disqualification of any member on the pressure of the ruling party for uncertain time. Moreover, there can be no Judicial review until the order by presiding member is passed.

There have been many cases where the disqualification of members was on hold and they were still representing the house though they have defected. So, it contains many loopholes that need to be filled. If not filled then this law is baseless in my books. The power of disqualification can be provided to some other authority who have no political influence instead of presiding officers from my standpoint. There is always a void which gets left away intentionally or unintentionally but they must be filled as it is found.