{"id":361558,"date":"2026-04-25T17:40:49","date_gmt":"2026-04-25T12:10:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/?p=361558"},"modified":"2026-04-25T17:40:49","modified_gmt":"2026-04-25T12:10:49","slug":"anti-defection-law-explained-pointwise","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/anti-defection-law-explained-pointwise\/","title":{"rendered":"Anti-Defection Law &#8211; Explained Pointwise"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Recently, seven Rajya Sabha MPs from a political party (out of a total of ten) switched allegiance to another party. However, they will not face disqualification under the Anti-Defection Law due to the \u2018merger\u2019 provision. In this context, it becomes important to understand the Anti-Defection Law in a comprehensive manner.<\/p>\n<figure id=\"attachment_361561\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-361561\" style=\"width: 750px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-361561 size-large\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Screenshot-2026-04-25-173915.png?resize=750%2C450&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"Anti-Defection Law\" width=\"750\" height=\"450\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Screenshot-2026-04-25-173915.png?resize=1024%2C615&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Screenshot-2026-04-25-173915.png?resize=300%2C180&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Screenshot-2026-04-25-173915.png?resize=768%2C462&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Screenshot-2026-04-25-173915.png?w=1346&amp;ssl=1 1346w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 750px) 100vw, 750px\" \/><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-361561\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Source: Indian School of Democracy<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<table style=\"border-collapse: collapse; width: 100%;\">\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"width: 100%; text-align: center;\"><strong>Table of Content<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"width: 100%;\"><a href=\"#h1\">What is Anti-Defection Law?<\/a><br \/>\n<a href=\"#h2\">Evolution of the Anti-Defection Law<\/a><br \/>\n<a href=\"#h3\">What was need for introducing the Anti-Defection Law?<\/a><br \/>\n<a href=\"#h4\">What have been the concerns\/issues raised against the Anti-Defection Law?<\/a><br \/>\n<a href=\"#h5\">What are the reforms that should be introduced into the Anti-Defection Law?<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<h2><strong><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><a id=\"h1\"><\/a>What is Anti-Defection Law<\/span>?<\/strong><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>The 10th Schedule of the Constitution, also known as\u00a0<strong>Anti-Defection Law<\/strong>, addresses disqualification of\u00a0<b>MPs and MLAs for defection<\/b>, a response to the political instability of the late 1960s when\u00a0<b>\u201cparty-hopping MLAs\u201d<\/b>\u00a0toppled multiple state governments.<\/li>\n<li>Under the 10th Schedule, a member of either Parliament (MPs) or a State Legislature (MLAs\/MLCs) can be disqualified if:\n<ol>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"5,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Voluntary Resignation:<\/b>\u00a0They voluntarily give up their membership of the political party on whose ticket they were elected.<\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"5,1,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Defying the Whip:<\/b>\u00a0They vote or abstain from voting in the House contrary to the directions (the \u201cwhip\u201d) issued by their political party without prior permission.<\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"5,2,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Independent Members:<\/b>\u00a0An independent candidate joins any political party after being elected.<\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"5,3,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Nominated Members:<\/b>\u00a0A nominated member joins a political party after\u00a0<b data-path-to-node=\"5,3,0\" data-index-in-node=\"68\">six months<\/b>\u00a0from the date they took their seat.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Exceptions:<\/strong>\n<ol>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"7,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Merger:<\/b>\u00a0If at least\u00a0<b data-path-to-node=\"7,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"20\">two-thirds<\/b>\u00a0of the members of a legislative party agree to merge with another party, they are not disqualified.<\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"7,1,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Presiding Officers:<\/b>\u00a0A person elected as the Speaker or Chairman can resign from their party to maintain neutrality and can rejoin it after they leave the office without facing disqualification.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Deciding Authority:<\/strong>\u00a0The power to decide on disqualification rests with the\u00a0<b data-path-to-node=\"9\" data-index-in-node=\"55\">Presiding Officer<\/b>\u00a0of the House (the Speaker in the Lok Sabha\/Assemblies and the Chairman in the Rajya Sabha\/Councils).<\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"10,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Judicial Review:<\/b>\u00a0Originally, the law stated the Presiding Officer\u2019s decision was final and could not be challenged in court. However, in the\u00a0<b data-path-to-node=\"10,0\" data-index-in-node=\"158\">Kihoto Hollohan case (1992)<\/b>, the Supreme Court ruled that the Speaker acts as a tribunal, meaning their decision is subject to\u00a0<b data-path-to-node=\"10,0\" data-index-in-node=\"285\">judicial review<\/b>\u00a0by High Courts and the Supreme Court.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><strong><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><a id=\"h2\"><\/a>Evolution of the Anti-Defection Law<\/span>:<\/strong><\/h2>\n<table style=\"width: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; border-style: solid; border-color: #000000; background-color: #eef2b8;\">\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"width: 11.7834%;\"><strong>Pre-1985<\/strong><\/td>\n<td style=\"width: 88.2166%;\"><strong><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">The Era of &#8220;Aaya Ram, Gaya Ram&#8221;<\/span>:<\/strong><br \/>\nIn the 1960s and 70s, Indian politics was plagued by frequent floor-crossing. The most famous instance occurred in 1967, when Haryana MLA Gaya Lal changed parties three times in a single day. This instability led to the fall of multiple state governments and created a culture of opportunism where legislators would jump ship for cabinet positions or other incentives.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"width: 11.7834%;\"><strong>1985<\/strong><\/td>\n<td style=\"width: 88.2166%;\"><strong><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">52nd Amendment Act<\/span>:<\/strong><br \/>\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The <\/span><b>Tenth Schedule<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> of the Indian Constitution, also known as the <\/span><b>Anti-Defection Law<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, was inserted by the <\/span><b>52nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1985<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, to curb the growing menace of political defections &amp; to provide a legal framework for disqualifying defectors.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"width: 11.7834%;\"><strong>1992<\/strong><\/td>\n<td style=\"width: 88.2166%;\"><strong><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Kihoto Hollohan Case<\/span>:<\/strong><br \/>\nThis landmark judgment upheld the constitutional validity of the Tenth Schedule. Crucially, it declared that while the Speaker has the power to decide disqualification cases, their decision is\u00a0<strong>not immune from judicial review<\/strong>. Courts can intervene in cases of\u00a0<em>mala fide<\/em>\u00a0intent or jurisdictional error.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"width: 11.7834%;\"><strong>2003<\/strong><\/td>\n<td style=\"width: 88.2166%;\"><strong><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">The 91st Amendment (2003)<\/span>:<br \/>\n<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"13,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Removed the \u201cSplit\u201d provision:<\/b>\u00a0Previously, a \u201csplit\u201d by one-third of a party\u2019s members was protected. This was removed to prevent mass defections.<\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"13,1,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Ministerial Limit:<\/b>\u00a0It capped the total number of ministers (including the PM\/CM) at\u00a0<b data-path-to-node=\"13,1,0\" data-index-in-node=\"84\">15%<\/b>\u00a0of the total strength of the Lok Sabha or State Assembly.<\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"13,2,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Holding Office:<\/b> A member disqualified under the 10th Schedule cannot hold any remunerative political post or ministerial position until they are re-elected.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"width: 11.7834%;\"><strong>2020-2025<\/strong><\/td>\n<td style=\"width: 88.2166%;\"><strong>Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. Speaker, Manipur (2020)<\/strong>\u00a0and the recent\u00a0<strong>Padi Kaushik Reddy v. Telangana (2025)<\/strong>\u00a0case, the Supreme Court directed Speakers to decide disqualification petitions within a\u00a0<strong>&#8220;reasonable period,&#8221;<\/strong>\u00a0explicitly stating a\u00a0<strong>three-month timeline.<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<h2><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong><a id=\"h3\"><\/a>What was need for introducing the Anti-Defection Law?<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Ensuring Political Stability:<\/strong> Between the general elections of 1967 and 1971, nearly <b data-path-to-node=\"4\" data-index-in-node=\"55\">50% of the 4,000 odd legislators<\/b> in Central and State assemblies defected. State governments were collapsing like houses of cards. When a government is constantly worried about losing its majority to a rival party&#8217;s &#8220;offer,&#8221; it focuses on survival rather than policy-making. By making it difficult for individuals to defect without losing their seats, the law ensures that the government can focus on long-term administration rather than constant survival tactics.<\/li>\n<li><strong>To Curb the Influence of Money and Power: <\/strong>Defections were rarely driven by ideology; they were driven by <b data-path-to-node=\"7\" data-index-in-node=\"63\">&#8220;Horse Trading&#8221;<\/b> (Political Corruption). Legislators would defect in exchange for a Cabinet berth in the new government. Large sums of money being paid to &#8220;buy&#8221; the loyalty of independent and small-party candidates to tip the scales during a floor test.<\/li>\n<li><strong>To Prevent the Breach of Electorate&#8217;s Trust:<\/strong> When a citizen votes for a candidate, they are often voting for the <b data-path-to-node=\"11,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"68\">party\u2019s manifesto and ideology.<\/b> Defection of a candidate effectively nullifies the mandate of the voters. The law was intended to ensure that a representative remains accountable to the platform they were elected on.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Party Discipline and Cohesion:\u00a0<\/strong>The law gives legal teeth to the <b data-path-to-node=\"13\" data-index-in-node=\"33\">Political Party<\/b> as an institution. Through the system of &#8220;Whips,&#8221; parties can ensure that their members vote as a unified block on crucial Bills. This prevents internal sabotage and ensures that the legislative agenda of the party in power can actually be implemented.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Constitutional Legitimacy to Political Parties:<\/strong> Until the Tenth Schedule was added, political parties had no formal mention in the Indian Constitution. The Anti-Defection Law provided <b data-path-to-node=\"16\" data-index-in-node=\"151\">constitutional recognition<\/b> to political parties, acknowledging them as the fundamental units of Indian democracy.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Saving of Taxpayer&#8217;s Money:<\/strong> Frequent defections and floor-crossings often led to mid-term elections. By preventing governments from collapsing every few months, the law helped save the enormous expenditure of conducting frequent elections and the cost of President&#8217;s Rule (which often followed unstable assemblies).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<h2><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong><a id=\"h4\"><\/a>What have been the concerns\/issues raised against the Anti-Defection Law?<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Suppression of Legislative Dissent:\u00a0<\/strong>\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: circle;\">\n<li><span class=\"citation-26\">Since every member <\/span><i data-path-to-node=\"3,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"50\"><span class=\"citation-26\">must<\/span><\/i><span class=\"citation-26 citation-end-26\"> vote according to the party whip (under threat of disqualification), the outcome of most debates is a foregone conclusion.<\/span> <span class=\"citation-25 citation-end-25\">This reduces the significance of individual arguments and logical persuasion on the floor of the House.<\/span><\/li>\n<li>It also creates a conflict of interest. <span class=\"citation-24 citation-end-24\">A legislator may feel that a specific Bill (e.g. a controversial land acquisition law) is bad for their specific constituency, but they are legally forced to vote for it if their party commands it.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Partisanship of the Speaker:<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"6,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Lack of Neutrality:<\/b><span class=\"citation-22 citation-end-22\"> Speakers usually belong to the ruling party and do not resign from their party upon taking office.<\/span> <span class=\"citation-21 citation-end-21\">This often leads to biased decisions where disqualification petitions against opposition members are fast-tracked, while those against members supporting the ruling party are delayed.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"6,1,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\"><span class=\"citation-20\">Indefinite Delays:<\/span><\/b><span class=\"citation-20 citation-end-20\"> The law originally set no timeline for the Speaker to decide.<\/span> <span class=\"citation-19 citation-end-19\">This has allowed Speakers to &#8220;sit on&#8221; petitions for years, effectively allowing defecting members to complete their terms without consequences.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Wholesale Defection:<\/strong> The law only punishes &#8220;retail&#8221; (individual) defection but incentivizes &#8220;wholesale&#8221; (mass) defection. <span class=\"citation-17\">Under the 91st Amendment, if <\/span><b data-path-to-node=\"9,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"49\"><span class=\"citation-17\">two-thirds<\/span><\/b><span class=\"citation-17 citation-end-17\"> of a party&#8217;s legislators defect together, it is labeled a &#8220;merger&#8221; and they face no penalty.<\/span> Thus, despite the law, defections continue due to inducements and intimidation, with legislators often kept in <em><strong>&#8220;resorts&#8221;<\/strong><\/em> during political crises.<\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"12,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Resignation over Defection:<\/b> Instead of voting against the whip, legislators simply <b data-path-to-node=\"12,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"83\">resign<\/b> from the House. This brings down the government&#8217;s majority. Once the government falls, these members often contest by-elections on the ticket of the opposing party and return to the House as ministers. This bypasses the spirit of the law while following its letter.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Lack of Intra-Party Democracy<\/strong>: The law gives supreme power to the party leadership via the &#8220;Whip,&#8221; it discourages internal democracy. Rank-and-file members are afraid to criticize the leadership or policy decisions within the party because an expulsion could end their career.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<h2><strong><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><a id=\"h5\"><\/a>What are the reforms that should be introduced into the Anti-Defection Law<\/span>?<\/strong><\/h2>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Neutral Decision-Making Authority:\u00a0<\/strong>The law gives power to disqualify a member to the Speaker of the Legislature. This should be replaced with:\n<ol style=\"list-style-type: lower-alpha;\">\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"5,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Election Commission:<\/b><span class=\"citation-66\"> Both the <\/span><b data-path-to-node=\"5,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"23\"><span class=\"citation-66\">Election Commission of India<\/span><\/b><span class=\"citation-66\"> and the <\/span><b data-path-to-node=\"5,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"60\"><span class=\"citation-66\">2nd Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC)<\/span><\/b><span class=\"citation-66\"> suggest that the President (for MP&#8217;s) or Governor (for MLA&#8217;s) should decide defection cases based on the <\/span><b data-path-to-node=\"5,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"209\"><span class=\"citation-66\">binding advice of the Election Commission.<\/span><\/b><\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"5,1,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\"><span class=\"citation-65\">Independent Tribunal:<\/span><\/b><span class=\"citation-65\"> In the <\/span><i data-path-to-node=\"5,1,0\" data-index-in-node=\"29\"><span class=\"citation-65\">Keisham Meghachandra Singh case (2020)<\/span><\/i><span class=\"citation-65\">, the Supreme Court suggested that Parliament should consider creating a <\/span><b data-path-to-node=\"5,1,0\" data-index-in-node=\"140\"><span class=\"citation-65\">permanent independent tribunal<\/span><\/b><span class=\"citation-65 citation-end-65\"> to decide these cases to ensure impartiality.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Limiting the Scope of the &#8220;Whip&#8221;:<\/strong> To prevent the law from silencing legitimate dissent, the <b data-path-to-node=\"10\" data-index-in-node=\"76\">Dinesh Goswami Committee<\/b> recommended:\n<ol style=\"list-style-type: lower-alpha;\">\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"11,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\"><span class=\"citation-62\">Use of Whip Only for Survival:<\/span><\/b><span class=\"citation-62\"> The &#8220;Whip&#8221; (and subsequent disqualification for defying it) should only apply to motions that affect the <\/span><b data-path-to-node=\"11,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"124\"><span class=\"citation-62\">survival of the government<\/span><\/b><span class=\"citation-62\"> for e.g. for No-Confidence Motions, Money Bills (Budgets), or Votes of Thanks<\/span><span class=\"citation-62\">.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"11,1,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Freedom of Conscience:<\/b><span class=\"citation-60 citation-end-60\"> On all other Bills (social, environmental, developmental), legislators should be free to vote according to their conscience or their constituents&#8217; interests without fear of losing their seat.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>The Merger Loophole:<\/strong> <span class=\"citation-59 citation-end-59\">The current rule allows 2\/3rd of a party to merge with another.<\/span> <span class=\"citation-58 citation-end-58\">This simply legalizes mass horse-trading. This can be prevented by:<\/span>\n<ol style=\"list-style-type: lower-alpha;\">\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"14,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Raising the Bar:<\/b> Raising the threshold to <b data-path-to-node=\"14,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"55\">3\/4ths<\/b> or even removing the &#8220;merger&#8221; exception entirely.<\/li>\n<li><b data-path-to-node=\"14,1,0\" data-index-in-node=\"0\">Resign and Re-elect:<\/b> The Law Commission recommended that any person who defects\u2014whether individually or as part of a group\u2014must <b data-path-to-node=\"14,1,0\" data-index-in-node=\"150\">immediately resign<\/b> and cannot hold any ministerial post until they win a by-election.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>Ban on Ministerial Posts:<\/strong> While the 91st Amendment bars defectors from being ministers until they are re-elected, politicians use the &#8220;Resignation Route&#8221; to bypass this. To prevent this, any legislator who resigns during the term of a House should be barred from contesting by-elections or holding a remunerative political post for the <b data-path-to-node=\"17,0,0\" data-index-in-node=\"189\">remainder of that House&#8217;s term<\/b> (e.g., up to 5 years).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Enforce Strict Timelines for Decisions:<\/strong> Introduce a <strong>statutory deadline<\/strong> for Speakers to decide on disqualification petitions, with\u00a0<strong>90 days<\/strong> being a commonly suggested benchmark. If a decision is not made within this period, the defecting member should automatically face disqualification.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Strengthen Deterrence through Severe Penalties:<\/strong> To make defection a financially and politically unattractive proposition, stricter punishments are needed:\n<ol style=\"list-style-type: lower-alpha;\">\n<li><strong>Six-Year Disqualification:<\/strong>\u00a0Bar a disqualified defector from contesting any election for\u00a0<strong>six years<\/strong> (a full electoral cycle), ensuring they cannot simply switch sides as a short-term career move.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Loss of Pension:<\/strong>\u00a0Newer proposals, inspired by recent state-level actions in Himachal Pradesh, suggest that legislators disqualified under the anti-defection law should also\u00a0<strong>forfeit their right to a legislative pension.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<table style=\"border-collapse: collapse; width: 100%;\">\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"width: 100%;\">UPSC GS-2: Indian Polity<br \/>\nRead More: <a href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/explained\/explained-politics\/aap-mps-joining-bjp-disqualification-anti-defection-law-explained-10654324\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Indian Express<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Recently, seven Rajya Sabha MPs from a political party (out of a total of ten) switched allegiance to another party. However, they will not face disqualification under the Anti-Defection Law due to the \u2018merger\u2019 provision. In this context, it becomes important to understand the Anti-Defection Law in a comprehensive manner. Table of Content What is&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/anti-defection-law-explained-pointwise\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Anti-Defection Law &#8211; Explained Pointwise<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10391,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[130],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-361558","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-7-pm","entry"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","views":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/361558","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10391"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=361558"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/361558\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=361558"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=361558"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=361558"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}