[Answered] Evaluate the effectiveness of the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution in curbing political defections. How has it impacted the stability of governments and the quality of democracy in India?

The 10th Schedule of the Indian Constitution which talks about the anti-defection law is designed to prevent political defections prompted by the lure of office or material benefits or other like considerations. The Anti-defection law was passed by Parliament in 1985 and reinforced in 2002. Recently, the Maharashtra Assembly Speaker has refused to disqualify 40 MLAs of the Eknath Shinde faction after recognising it as the real Shiv Sena raising the effectiveness of the Tenth Schedule.

• Effectiveness in Curbing Defections: The Tenth Schedule has been somewhat effective in curbing defections by setting clear guidelines and consequences for elected representatives who switch parties. It disqualifies members of Parliament and state legislatures if they voluntarily give up their membership of a political party or disobey the party’s whip on crucial votes. The law also applies to splits within parties, aiming to prevent engineered defections. However, loopholes and challenges in its enforcement have limited its effectiveness. The law did not apply to defections in the Rajya Sabha (Upper House of Parliament) before 2003, and the disqualification process is often subject to delays, allowing defectors to enjoy the benefits of their actions for an extended period.
• Impact on Political Stability: The Anti-Defection Law has affected India’s political stability in a variety of ways. On the one hand, the possibility of being disqualified has discouraged some members from moving parties. However, political maneuvering has been used to get around the law, particularly through planned splits and mergers. Political instability has occasionally resulted from this since defections can lead to the formation or overthrow of administrations. The degree to which the law’s provisions are followed, the degree of political ethics, and the readiness of political parties to put stability ahead of immediate advantages all influence how effective the law is at maintaining political stability.
• Quality of Democracy: The Anti-Defection Law has come under fire for restricting the independence of elected officials, even if its goal is to bolster democracy by prohibiting opportunistic political defections. Because lawmakers can fear losing their jobs if they deviate from the party line, critics claim that the rule restricts their ability to express themselves freely and to dissent inside political parties. Furthermore, the legislation does not address matters of lobbying, horse-trading, or other immoral activities that could potentially have an impact on political outcomes. The Anti-Defection Law may not directly address several other elements that influence India’s democracy, such as the predominance of dynastic politics and corruption.
• Suggested reform: In the case of Sadiq Ali versus the Election Commission of India (1971), the Supreme Court established a three-test formula to determine the legitimate faction to be recognized as the original political party by the Election Commission. These criteria include assessing the aims and objectives of the party, examining its internal democratic processes as reflected in the party’s constitution, and considering the majority in both the legislative and organizational wings of the party.

Conclusion

While legal reforms are necessary the real reform required is institutionalizing internal democracy through regular inner-party elections in our political parties with strict monitoring by the Election Commission.