Away with the stupid laws-Law Commission recommends..
JPR:
Get a load of this, 'bout time too.
Anyway what is up with the recommendation of banning 'Anglo Indians',I remember an S.P.Lewis who had been a permanent fixture in Kerala politics, he was either an MLA or MP for quite a long time.I don't understand the purpose of this recommendation at all unless the commission's definition of 'Anglo Indian' is something other than the conventional one. I also went to school with a few Anglo Indian students, the last time I checked they were all Indians inspite of their miniscule 'anglo' blood which they inherited from some distant past, not necessarily inherited under their own volition, granted one or two of their forefathers' complicity might have done the trick. I don't know what do you think?
=========================
Law Commission recommends sweeping changes in electoral laws
In keeping with the trend of commissions and reports, the Law Commission has recommended sweeping changes in electoral laws in yet another report.
The Law Commission has suggested changes to make the electoral system more representative, fair and transparent. In its 170th report, a number of reforms have been offered for betterment of the system of elections and governance. The major considerations for recommendation contained in the report include --
*Ensuring that Lok Sabha and Assembly elections are held simultaneously.
*Terminating the nomination of Anglo-Indians to the Lok Sabha.
*Introducing the list system based on the German constitutional model.
*Use of electronic voting machines.
*Restriction on no-confidence motion, requiring the motion to be accompanied by another expressing confidence in a named individual.
*Reduction of money power in elections and state funding of the same.
*Treating a pre-poll coalition or front as a single party in order to contain defections among political parties.
*Inclusion of a chapter in the Representation of Peoples Act to regulate the formation and functioning of political parties in order to avoid their splintering and to ensure internal party democracy.
*Adopting a rule requiring only a candidate who obtains over 50 per cent votes to be declared elected and holding of run-off elections wherever necessary.
*Introducing the concept of negative voting.
*Not to entitle any seat to a party obtaining less than five per cent of the total votes.
*Barring Independent candidates from contesting elections.
Making it obligatory upon every candidate to make public his or her assets and those of his or her family members and dependents.
*Making it obligatory upon every candidate to make public his or her particulars regarding any criminal case pending against them.
*The report commenced in September 1998 and the final version was sent in May-June 1999. It will be tabled in the Parliament when the new House meets.
The changes offered and recommended in the report can be described as sweeping. Some of the recommendations may even require constitutional amendment. However, noted constitutional expert and former Lok Sabha secretary general Subhash Kashyap said most of these considerations in the Law Commission report are unimplementable in their present form.
His view is in sharp contrast with that of Union minister for Law and eminent lawyer Ram Jethmalani who said that all recommendations of the Law Commission are worthy of being passed and implemented.
Chairman of Law Commission Justice B P Jeevan Reddy said that electoral reforms will help remove the inequities and distortions arising out of a multiplicity of parties.
Regarding the recommendation to bar Independent candidates from contesting elections, Justice Reddy said Independent candidates and representatives of smaller parties held the country at ransom during the previous Lok Sabha. In legalspeak, the ban can be imposed as contesting elections is a statutory and not a fundamental right.
In contrast, Kashyap says such a ban is not fair on people who may wish to contest without the baggage of ideology of any party. Jethmalani said that speaking personally, barring anyone from contesting elections is not a very constitutional step. Legal advisor to Election Commission S K Mendiratta said that people cannot be completely barred from contesting elections. However, certain restrictions can be put so that only those candidates who have comparatively higher chances of winning, are allowed to contest.
The idea of barring anyone from contesting elections may boomerang into a major political issue. It is a question as much of political expediency as personal rights and before being implemented, it needs to be debated across the political spectrum and among the populace. The present Lok Sabha has six Independent members, including Union minister for social welfare Maneka Gandhi.
The panel has also suggested for recommendation that Parliamentary and state Assembly elections be held simultaneously in order to bring about a political order in the country. In 1952, all elections were held simultaneously. But over the years, the Lok Sabha and different states started going to polls in different years though they were initially meant to go to polls every five years. To eliminate the holding of elections almost every year, the Commission has recommended a gradual return to the stage where elections are held in the same year.
This provision has a flip side to it. One interpretation can point to a fixed five-year term for the elected bodies. Among political parties, Bharatiya Janata party has even promised to look into this through a constitutional amendment.
Kashyap is not in favour of a fixed term for any legislative body as this can stifle accountability which is an essential part of any democracy. He said that accountability is more important than stability that is being projected as the reason for fixing the term of legislatures. He said this is not in the interest of either the people or the nation or even the elected members, adding that it is only in the interest of the political party in power.
Mendiratta says a five-year term is required to ensure development since the model code of conduct, if imposed too frequently, will not allow any developmental project to be implemented.
To ensure progress, there is also a need to bring about polarisation of parties on the political scene of the country. Justice Reddy said there should not be more than two or three political coalitions or fronts, as in Germany. The recently dissolved Lok Sabha contained representatives from 34 parties which created a chaotic situation, he said. Kashyap agrees that smaller parties should merge with bigger parties and their candidates should contest on common symbols.
In Germany, only those parties get represented who amass more than five per cent of the total votes polled. If an Independent candidate or the party of a winning candidate gets less than five per cent of the total votes polled in the elections, the next in the list gets a chance to get elected. The Law panel has suggested a similar model for consideration of recommendation. This is expected to ensure that candidates with a small percentage of votes don't get elected and therefore, don't have a say in running the government, as they may jeopardise government decisions for petty interests.
If none of the candidates in a constituency fulfils the five-per cent criterion, a run-off election can be held. According to the report, run-off election can also be held if no candidate manages to get 50 per cent plus one vote. However, most elected representatives get less than 50 per cent votes. In the present Lok Sabha, almost 75 per cent to 80 per cent of the members have polled less than 50 per cent votes. Justice Reddy informed that even Vice-President Krishna Kant has been talking about introducing this provision in electoral reforms.
However, Kashyap finds this suggestion absurd since it is difficult to hold repoll in the majority of constituencies as not many candidates are likely to get the requisite percentage of votes. Like Justice Reddy, Kashyap also recommended that the issue be debated since a run-off election can be full of practical difficulties. It may be near-impossible to re-conduct the massive exercise. Mendiratta agrees, saying that run-off elections can be held only after considering the financial health of the country.
The Commission has also examined and made recommendations for introducing the list system based on the German constitutional model. The list system includes the system of proportional representation apart from direct representation which, says Kashyap, is not logical if applied in India. According to the model, the more seats a party wins, the greater will be its share of nominated members in a House. It will accrue higher cost of running the Parliament as the law Commission has recommended that 120 members be nominated to the Lok Sabha through the list system. Moreover, this will increase the role of money power in the already unaccounted-for system. People will be sold out to the highest bidder as their votes will indirectly lead to nominations by parties and the nominated members may not be acceptable to the voters. Kashyap calls it "a highly sinister move", if implemented.
However, Jethmalani says that the list system needs to be brought into existence as it will address the growing population in the country. Terming it a step in the right direction, he said this is the best way to increase the number of representatives in the Lok Sabha.
The provision for restriction on the no-confidence motion is another important feature of the report. The constructive vote of no-confidence can prove to be useful as it calls for providing an alternative name in whom the confidence is shown. Moreover, it can be done without any constitutional amendment, says Kashyap. This can prove to be another way of ensuring the full term of an elected government. It can also prevent a repeat of the unsavoury situation that arose in the wake of Prime Minister Vajpayee losing the confidence of the House, though no-one else could replace him. This led to an unwanted dissolution of the Lok Sabha in April and the declaration of elections the third time in three years.
The electoral reforms report has also suggested for recommendation the disqualification of a defector from any party or coalition. This will make members stick to their parties, Justice Reddy said. Had this provision been there during the tenure of the BJP-led government at the Centre, the Jayalalitha-led All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam would have been disqualified for walking out of the coalition. The report has also recommended that pre-poll coalitions of fronts be treated as a single party in order to contain defections.
On making it obligatory upon every candidate to declare the assets and any criminal cases of self or of his or her spouse and dependent relations, Kashyap said it is a good idea and is desirable. He said it can benefit our country if there is political will. However, he added that everyone talks about transparency, but no political party is ready for such declarations.
Kashyap said law should also provide for audit of accounts of all political parties. These audited accounts should be made public for better and cleaner functioning of the political system.
The Law Commission has also recommended the introduction of negative voting. In the negative vote system, the ballot paper has the provision for not voting for any of the given contestants. The negative vote will also be counted as a vote and a candidate will still have to get 50 per cent of the votes inclusive of negative votes, if any. Hence, the two provisions are inextricably linked. Kashyap said the concept of negative vote is practical only if political awareness of the electorate is high. Hence, it should be debated before being implemented since the awareness and literacy levels in the country are low.
On state funding of political parties, the Commission has supported the proposal contained in the Indrajit Gupta Committee report -- subject to certain changes -- on partial funding of elections by the state.
On termination of the nomination of Anglo-Indian members in the Lok Sabha, Justice Reddy said their population is almost negligible today as compared to the time when the provision was made. Hence, the provision for their nomination can be terminated. Jethmalani agrees, saying that the Anglo-Indians would themselves not want to retain it anymore as it involves being dependent on a political party.
The recommendations of Law Commission are meant to arrest and reverse the process of proliferation and splintering of political parties and introducing stability in governance. It remain to be seen how many suggestions are made into recommendations and implemented. Or will the report be one of the many that are read, laid aside and forgotten? |
