Disqualification of legislators

(Mains GS 2 : Parliament and State legislatures—structure, functioning, conduct of business, powers & privileges and issues arising out of these.)

Context:

• Recently, an Uttar Pradesh legislator was convicted on criminal charges which backs the  spotlight on legislators facing serious charges, including those holding top posts even after conviction.
• The Assembly Secretariat cited the Supreme Court judgment of 2013 in Lily Thomas vs. Union of India case (along with Lok Prahari vs. Union of India ), wherein the apex court ruled that any Member of Parliament, Member of the Assembly or Member of the Legislative Council who is convicted of a crime and given a minimum of two years’ imprisonment, loses membership of the House with immediate effect.

Conviction attract disqualification:

• Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951, contains provisions aimed at decriminalising electoral politics. There are two categories of criminal cases that attract disqualification upon conviction. 
• In the first category are offences that entail disqualification for a period of six years upon any conviction.
• If the punishment is a fine, the six-year period will run from the date of conviction, but if there is a prison sentence, the disqualification will begin on the date of conviction, and will continue up to the completion of six years after the date of release from jail.
• All other criminal provisions form a separate category under which mere conviction will not entail disqualification. A sentence of at least two years in prison is needed to incur such disqualification.

Offenses included:

• Major IPC offences are included under first category are offences are making speeches that cause enmity between groups (Sec.153A) and doing so in a place of worship (Sec.505), bribery and personation during elections and other electoral offences, offences relating to rape and cruelty to women by husband and latter’s relatives. 
• Besides, serious provisions of special laws such as the Protection of Civil Rights Act, Customs Act, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act etc are among the category of offences that entail disqualification regardless of the quantum of punishment. 
• Laws for prevention of Sati, corruption, terrorism and insult to national flag and national anthem etc are also part of this group.

Protection for legislators:

• Under Section 8(4) of the RPA, legislators could avoid immediate disqualification until 2013.
• The provision said that with respect to a Member of Parliament or a State legislator the disqualification will not take effect for three months.
• If within that period, the convicted legislator files an appeal or revision application, it will not take effect until the disposal of the appeal or application.
• But  in the Lily Thomas vs. Union of India and Lok Prahari case the Supreme Court struck down clause (4) as unconstitutional, thus removing the protection enjoyed by lawmakers.

Remedy for disqualification:

• The Supreme Court has the power to stay not only the sentence, but also the conviction of a person.
• In some rare cases, conviction has been stayed to enable the appellant to contest an election, however, the SC has made it clear that such a stay should be very rare and for special reasons.
• The RPA itself provides a remedy through the Election Commission as under Sec. 11 of the Act, the EC may record reasons and either remove, or reduce the period of, a person’s disqualification.
• The EC exercised this power for Sikkim Chief Minister P.S. Tamang, who served a one-year sentence for corruption, and reduced his disqualification so as to contest a byelection and remain in office.

Conclusion:

• A recent report by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), a New Delhi based-organisation working in the area of political reforms, pointed out the increasing criminalisation of politics which needs to be tackled to uphold the real soul of democratic principles.