Supreme Court on Anti-Defection Law 

Syllabus: GS2/Governance

In News

• The Supreme Court urged Parliament to reconsider its reliance on Assembly Speakers and Chairmen to fairly and promptly handle disqualification cases under the anti-defection law.
  • The Court criticized delays and bias in such proceedings and directed the Telangana Speaker to decide long-pending disqualification petitions against 10 BRS MLAs who defected to the Congress in 2024.

What is the Anti-defection law?

• Aaya Ram Gaya Ram was a phrase that became popular in Indian politics after a Haryana MLA Gaya Lal changed his party thrice within the same day in 1967.  
• The anti-defection law (Tenth Schedule of the Constitution) was inserted by the 52nd Amendment in 1985 to prevent political defections. 

Features of the Anti-Defection Law

• Disqualification on ground of defection: A legislator belonging to a political party will be disqualified if he: (i) voluntarily gives up his party membership, or (ii) votes/abstains to vote in the House contrary to the direction issued by his political party.
  • A member is not disqualified if he has taken prior permission of his party, or if the voting or abstention is condoned by the party within 15 days.
  • Independent members will be disqualified if they join a political party after getting elected to the House. Nominated members will be disqualified if they join any political party six months after getting nominated. 
• The decision to disqualify a member from the House rests with the Chairman/Speaker of the House.

Exceptions

• The Tenth Schedule originally provided for two exceptions that would not render the members liable for disqualification.
  • One-third members of the ‘legislature party’ split to form a separate group. 
  • Merger of their ‘political party’ with another party that is approved by two-third members of its ‘legislature party’.
    • However, the first exception (one-third split) was removed in 2003 to strengthen the law.

Supreme Court Judgments

• Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992): The decisions of the Speaker regarding disqualification under the Tenth Schedule (Anti-defection Law) are subject to judicial review by the High Courts and the Supreme Court.
• Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. Speaker, Manipur (2020): The Supreme Court set a clear outer limit of three months for the Speaker to decide on a disqualification petition.

Key Issues and Challenges

• The Speaker decides defection cases, often with no fixed timeline, leading to delays and potential bias.
• Judicial review exists but courts are reluctant to intervene, citing legislative autonomy.
• It is argued that  the law curbs legislators’ freedom of expression and debate.
• The whip system enforces rigid party control, leaving little room for intra-party debate or dissent.

Conclusion and Way Forward

• The Anti-Defection Law has helped reduce political instability but suffers from implementation flaws and overreach, weakening its democratic purpose. 
• Reforms are needed to balance party discipline with accountability, ensure unbiased adjudication, and promote internal party democracy to strengthen India’s parliamentary system.

Source :IE