SC on Criminalisation of Politics

In News

Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) raised concerns as the criminalisation in politics is growing day by day.

Supreme Court’s Statement

• The SC found nine political parties guilty of contempt for not following in letter and spirit its February 13, 2020 direction to publish details of criminal cases against candidates fielded in Lok Sabha and Assembly polls.
• The SC appeals to lawmakers to come up with necessary legal provisions to fight this “have fallen on deaf ears”. 
• February 2020 Direction: 
  • It required political parties to publish details of criminal cases against its candidates on their websites besides a local vernacular newspaper and a national newspaper and social media accounts within 48 hours of candidate selection or not less than two weeks before the first date for filing of nominations, whichever is earlier. 
  • In its recent order, the court modified this and said the details “shall be published within 48 hours of the selection of the candidate” as the latter is difficult to follow given statutory provisions.

Criminalisation of Politics

• General idea: 
  • Began in the late 1970s.
  • There was no law to bar criminal candidates.
  • Alarming in the criminalisation of politics has increased in the last 4 general elections.
• Causes of Criminalization of Politics:
  • Unholy nexus between the politicians and bureaucracy: This undesirable and dangerous relationship between bureaucracy and political leaders opened the doors of criminalization of politics. 
  • Caste and religion: Both are responsible for the criminalization of politics. In bureaucracy there are certain procedures and rules for the promotion. But caste and religion both interfere in this process. In many states less qualified civil servants get promotion. 
  • Quota System: The quota system is also fully responsible for this. And it is also found that a minister of a particular caste or religion will distribute favour to the members of his own caste and religion. It is found in many states of India.
  • Party government: The system of party government is also responsible for the criminalization of politics. On the eve of the general election the leaders of the party give promises to the electorate. But when the political party comes to power then they will do nothing for the members who makes the political party wins, the funds which is given by the government for the public welfare and complete their need and wants but political party use that funds or money for their own purpose and this is also comes in criminalization of politics.
• Present laws for candidates involved in the criminalisation of politics:
  • Section 4A of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961: It states that an affidavit must be filed by each candidate. The affidavit should consist of:
    • If in any case the candidate has been accused of an offence that is punishable with two or more imprisonment, in any pending case in which the charges have been framed by the court.
  • Section 8, Representation of the People Act, 1951, (The R.P. Act, 1951): It pertains to the cases where a conviction for an offence is involved other than an offence that has been mentioned under and sentenced with imprisonment for one year or more.
• Reasons of the Criminalization:
  • Vote Bank: The political parties and individuals have astronomical expenditure for vote buying and other illegitimate purposes through which these people are so called goondas. A politician’s link with the constituency provides the congenial climate to political crime.
  • Lack of Political will: It remains the most persistent problem. Till date most efforts to reform the electoral system have been taken by EC and the SC only. It is parliament’s responsibility to amend the Representation of People Act 1951, deals with disqualification of candidates against whom charges have been proved in court for serious offences.
  • Muscle Power and Vote bank: Use of muscle power by politicians to collect votes in their favor.
  • Corruption: Use of money and other freebies in form of cash and kind both affect the final results of the election to a large extent.
  • Model Code of Conduct: Its blatant violation is seen in almost all elections.
  • Awareness Amongst Voters: Making voters aware of candidates with criminal antecedents has its limitations.
  • Lack of Governance: The SC’s orders or other legal mechanisms are not fully followed thereby creating an anarchic environment in the country. Law breakers end up becoming law makers.
  • Polarisation Towards Caste/Religions: People still go by their caste system, not considering the actual background, that matters, of the candidate.

Recommendations made by the Election Commission of India in its report on the Proposed Election Reforms, 2004

• Section 125A of the R.P.A: The Act should be amended, in order to provide more stringent punishment for concealing or providing wrong information in Form 26 under the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 to a minimum term of two years imprisonment and the alternative punishment of assessing a fine upon the candidate should be removed. 
• Amend Form 26: It was also recommended to amend Form 26 to include all items of the additional affidavit, that was prescribed by the Election Commission as well as to add a column where the candidates should disclose their annual income for the purpose of tax including their profession.
• Amend RPA,1951: The most important recommendation was to make an amendment in The R.P. Act, 1951, to insert a new section that should make a declaration of assets and the criminal cases that are pending against the candidate, this should be made necessary as part of the qualification for membership to the House of the People.
• Expand the scope of RPA, 1951: In order to deter the politicians from having a criminal background and the ones who have committed heinous crimes. In case a candidate has charges framed against him under Section 8 with regards to offences and otherwise, he should be disqualified for a duration of six years. 

Way Forward

• Statutory provisions: 
  • Only court order can not mend criminalisation in politics, political will is required.
  • To modify the existing laws legal changes should be made and to prevent the criminals from contesting in elections. The criminals should be blacklisted and disciplinary actions must be taken against them.
• Follow within 48 hour rule: The details of the candidate “shall be published within 48 hours of the selection of the candidate”
• Political parties to have details about their candidates on the homepage of website itself: 
  • The court also directed political parties to have a caption “candidates with criminal antecedents candidates” on their homepages. 
  • It asked ECI to create a dedicated mobile application containing information published by candidates regarding their criminal antecedents so that voters can get all the information in one stroke and to carry awareness campaigns for voters.
• Political Will: Corruption and criminalization of politics is hitting at the roots of democracy. However, mere disqualification for a certain period of time cannot be the final cure under any circumstance. Therefore, Parliament must take steps urgently to curb this menace. 
• Transparency in funding: Greater transparency should be brought in campaign financing that will make it less desirable for the political parties to comprise the candidates pertaining to criminal background.
• Penalty on political parties also: The penalty should be inflicted on the political parties who give tickets to the criminals to contest in elections.
• ECI should be given power to audit party accounts:  The Election Commission of India (ECI) should be given the power of auditing the financial accounts of the political parties or the finance of the political parties must be brought to the Right to Information (RTI) law.
• Better governance for awareness: Broader governance should be improved for voters in order to make them aware if there is any criminal background of the candidate. 
• Break the nexus: Adequate measures must be taken by the Election Commission in order to break the link between the criminals and politicians.
• Derecognizing Parties: In order to set aside the lacunae, it is only possible if the de-criminalisation of politics takes place. Candidates should be disqualified if they violate this provision and the political parties who with the knowledge of their antecedents should be derecognized and deregistered. 
• Permanent Debarment: Many committees made an important submission that any person who is convicted for heinous crimes such as murder, rape, dacoity, smuggling, etc. should be disbarred permanently from contesting in the elections.
• Establish Fast Track Courts to dispose such cases related to electoral Candidates:
  • There is an inherent need to supersede the existing judicial hierarchy and establish fast-track courts to accomplish this purpose. This encompasses a quick trial within six months from the time charges are framed so as to determine whether or not a candidate is qualified to hold office and applies to the post vide public elections.
• Some information about the candidate should be disclosed to Public so that they can make an informed decision. The questions should include: 
  • The crime that the candidate is accused of;
  • How many cases and what kind of cases are charged against the candidate?;
  • Details of the case, case number and name of Court;
  • At which stage the criminal case has reached – FIR or investigation or charge-sheet or trial;
  • Why can’t the other individuals without any criminal antecedents be selected as candidates?
• The Vohra Committees Report Analysis on “Criminalisation of Politics” should be given more attention.

Source: IE