The first Lok Sabha election happened in 1952. And for 15 years, till 1967, it was a period of stability, where governments were able to complete their full 5 year terms. But in 1967, Congress had been ruling the country for a long time, anti-incumbency was bound to set in. This was evident from the fact that Congress barely crossed the halfway mark in the Lok Sabha elections, and could not even muster a majority in 8 out of the 18 states that had elections.
This gave the rise to an era of instability in the Indian politics. Congress? loss in these elections made the opposition parties aware of Congress? declining popularity. The opposition saw an opportunity in this. As the opposition realised that Congress is losing the hegemony it acquired over the years, they all grasped at straws with both hands to make use of this opportunity. This gave rise to the politics of defection.
In the aftermath of the results, the idea of wielding power might force different ideological parties to come together, but due to ideological differences, there is never a sense of understanding within the coalition. This lack of understanding encourages politicians to defect to and fro. Distrust among the coalition partners is the initial motivation required for defection, but financial incentives are last push needed to change allegiances.
Stats will help put this claim into perspective. In 1967, this game of defections was played the most in the newly formed state of Haryana. Within one year of its formation, there was so much instability due to politicians changing camps, the state had to come under President?s Rule. Some politicians had mastered the art of defections. Hira Nand Arya changed camps 5 times. The infamous Gaya Lal is credited with Haryana being known as the land of ?Aya Rams and Gaya Rams?. It is said that Gaya Lal defected three times in one day in 1967.
In a span of three years from March 1967 to March 1970, there were a total of 1875 defections. Defections directly challenges the ability of government to operate and is a hinderance to the ability of the government to perform administrative tasks. The politicians immediately realised the threat that defections posed to the stability of the government.
Committee on Defections under YB Chavan
The GOI in February 1968 formed a committee to study the problem of defections and offer remedies. The committee presented their findings after 11 months in 1969. The basic gist of the findings of the committee was that there should be a cap on the limit of elected representatives who can be inducted into the Council of Ministers. Apart from monetary allurement, potential defectors were seduced by offering of a ministerial berth. If there was a cap on the number of ministers, the committee recommended, the parties will have less tricks up their sleeves to please potential defectors and bring them into their fold. Apart from this, the committee suggested that no defector should be allowed to be the PM or CM or any minister until he/she gets themselves re-elected under the aegis of their new party.
Even though this report was tabled before the parliament, no action was taken. There were two Constitutional Amendment Bills introduced in the parliament, one in 1973 and the other in 1978. But both the bills had to be dropped due to political reasons. Finally, in 1985, the then PM Rajiv Gandhi introduced the 52nd Amendment providing the Anti Defection Law in the parliament which was passed in both the houses. The act came into force on 1st March 1985.
Tenth Schedule added in the 52nd Amendment states that an elected MP or MLA is considered to be defected if he/she either resigns from the party or defy the whip?s order and does not toe the party line.
The 91st Amendment and other problems
Under the Prime Ministership of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, the Anti Defection Law was amended. This amendment changed the minimum number of party legislators required to quit the party without designating their resignation as defection. Earlier, if a minimum of 1/3rd of the party legislators in the house resign their position, it is not termed as defection, rather that group of legislators will be considered as a new faction or a part of some other party. The 91st Amendment in 2003 changed this minimum requirement to 2/3rd of the party legislators.
This is basically the history of the law in a nutshell. The law has helped a lot in curbing defections of party members, thus creating a more stable environment. It is no doubt that the law has been able to achieve what the lawmakers at that time intended, ultimately defections decreased, governments were actually able to complete their full terms without worrying about mass exodus of their party legislators to other parties.
Some recent events however have showed just how creative our politicians can be. News coming in from Karnataka, the Upper House of the Parliament and most recently Goa has shown how the Anti Defection Law is being proven obsolete. The fiaso that went on in the Karnataka Assembly for some days has finally ended with the falling of the Congress-JD(S) government, now it is only a matter of time that BJP forms the goverment there. This all stared when 15 MLAs of the ruing coalition decided to resign their posts. Similar thing happened in the Rajya Sabha when 4 out of 6 MPs of TDP boarded BJP?s ship, thus circumventing around the minimum 2/3rd condition of the 91st Amendment. Even in Goa, Congress which emerged as the single largest party in 2017, is now left with only 5 MLAs as the others have decided to change their allegiance to the BJP.
These events suggest that the law served its purpose when it was needed, but now, as the politicians have been able to outsmart the lawmakers, it is time for reform.
It is not only about how politicians have been able to find loopholes in the law, it is also about the other aspects of the law which directly go against the basic fundamental rights provided in the Constitution.
The Anti Defection Law prohibits any member of a political party to go against the whip issued by the party. If any member of a political party votes differently than the party line, that member is considered to have been defected from the party. This is the one of the biggest reasons that there is a need for reform. A member is supposed to have the same view as the whole party and is basically forced to cast their vote in a certain manner. In the United States, there is a phrase used by the current House Minority Leader, Kevin McCarthy, ?Vote your district, vote your conscience and don?t surprise me?. This phrase was made famous by the Kevin Spacey character in the US political show House of Cards. Although the last part of the phrase is irrelevant here, but the rest of the phrase explains how in the US, any member can vote however his/her conscience dictates, that means, members can defy the party whip while casting their votes. This is something which India should adopt from the more mature democracies such as the US.
There is one more argument which can be made here. If a single party enjoys majority in the Lok Sabha, which has been the case in India for 2 consecutive Lok Sabha elections (except for a short period of time when BJP went below the halfway mark after losing some bye-elections), then there is no point of bringing a no-confidence motion against the government as the party which enjoys the majority will just issue a whip to vote against the motion and the members will have to follow unless they want to leave the party.
Anti Defection Law robs the MPs from their right to vote and speech. Speaking in the Parliament against the party line is considered grounds for defection. The Schedule X of the Anti Defection Law has to be dropped as the passage of the bill is a pyrrhic victory for our democracy. It was meant to ensure stability of the government, but in hindsight, it is evident that the law neglected all these issues. But considering the recent events, the law does not even ensure stability, hence there is a need for urgent reform.
But given how the current government is benefitting from these fiascos, it is unlikely that the Anti Defection Law will be amended any time soon.
Dhairya Nagpal is a writing analyst at Qrius
Live News Daily is a trusted name in the digital news space, delivering accurate, timely, and in-depth reporting on a wide range of topics.