{"id":54423,"date":"2020-02-14T17:23:00","date_gmt":"2020-02-14T11:53:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogadmin.forumias.com\/?p=54423"},"modified":"2020-02-26T17:24:38","modified_gmt":"2020-02-26T11:54:38","slug":"7-pm-disentangling-politics-and-crime14th-february-2020","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/7-pm-disentangling-politics-and-crime14th-february-2020\/","title":{"rendered":"7 PM |Disentangling politics and crime|14th February 2020"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>Context: <\/strong>SC\nverdict on criminialisation of politics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>More in news:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>A two Judge Bench of Supreme Court\nrecently delivered a Judgment on the contempt petitions regarding\nthe&nbsp;criminalisation of politics in India.&nbsp;<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Criminalisation\nof politics in India:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>Criminalization of politics means the\nrising participation of criminals and people facing criminal charges in\npolitics. The term indicates people with criminal backgrounds becoming\npoliticians and elected representatives.&nbsp;<\/li><li>It has been observed that over the last\nfour general elections, there has been an alarming increase in the incidence of\ncriminals in politics. <\/li><li>In 2004, 24% of the Members of\nParliament had criminal cases pending against them; in 2009, that went up to\n30%; in 2014 to 34%; and in 2019 as many as 43% of MPs had criminal cases\npending against them.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Supreme\nCourt verdict of 13<sup>th<\/sup> February 2020: <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The court passed\norders on a contempt plea which raised the issue of criminalisation of politics\nclaiming that directions given by the apex court in its September 2018 verdict\nrelating to disclosure of criminal antecedents by candidates are not being\nfollowed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Court issued\nthe following directions in exercise of our constitutional powers under Articles\n129 and 142 of the Constitution of India:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>All the political parties must upload\ndetails of criminal cases against candidates on their websites, newspaper and\nsocial media platforms.<\/li><li>A party must clarify the reasons for\nfielding a particular candidate. It added that nominees must be selected on the\nbasis of merit. \u201cThe reason to select candidates should be based on&nbsp;merit\nand not winnability\u201d.<\/li><li>The details of criminial record shall be\npublished within 48 hours of the selection of the candidate or atleast two\nweeks before the first date for filing of nominations.<\/li><li>The court said political parties will be\nliable for contempt if they fail to comply with the order. It asked the\nElection Commission to file contempt petition in Supreme Court if political\nparties do not follow the order.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Reasons\nof criminalization of Politics:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li><strong>Vote\nbank Politics:<\/strong>&nbsp;Money and muscle power of criminals help\npolitical parties gain votes. Since, in India electoral politics is more about\ncaste, ethnicity, religion and several other factors, candidates overcome the\nreputational loss due to criminal charges and come out as victorious in\nelections.<\/li><li><strong>Black\nmoney in elections:&nbsp;<\/strong>Electoral politics is largely dependent\non the money and the funding that it receives. Since candidates with criminal\nrecords often possess greater wealth, they ensure greater inflow in money,\nlabour and other advantages that may help a party in successful campaign, and\nalso possess greater \u2018winnability\u2019.<\/li><li><strong>Lack\nof Intra-party democracy:<\/strong>&nbsp;Political parties in India largely\nlack intra-party democracy and the decisions on candidature are largely taken\nby the elite leadership of the party. Thus, the politicians with criminal\nrecords often escape the scrutiny by local workers and organisation of the\nparty.<\/li><li><strong>Lack\nof adequate deterrence:<\/strong>&nbsp;Due to the low levels of\nconvictions of MPs and MLAs, and delays in trials political parties are not\ndeterred from giving tickets to criminals.<\/li><li><strong>First\nPast the Post (FPTP) electoral system:<\/strong><\/li><li>FPTP\nelectoral system allows a candidate to be declared elected from the\nconstituency on the basis of plurality of votes polled and not on the majority\nof votes polled.<\/li><li>Thus,\na candidate with as low as 25-30% of valid votes polled may get elected.\nCriminals do not find difficult to secure the votes because of the use of their\nmoney and muscle power.<\/li><li><strong>Loopholes\nin the functioning of Election Commission: <\/strong>The Election\nCommission has prescribed forms for the contestants of elections to disclose\ntheir property details, cases pending in courts, convictions etc. while filing\ntheir nomination papers. However, these steps have not been stringent enough to\nbreak the nexus between crime and politics.<\/li><li><strong>Civil\nsociety<\/strong>&nbsp;in\nIndia has failed to check criminalization of politics due to resistance from\nestablishment, prevalent use of money and muscle power and lack of voter\nawareness<\/li><li><strong>Lack\nof ethics and values in Indian<\/strong> <strong>politics<\/strong>&nbsp;further accentuates the problem of criminalization.\nThe political parties have been reluctant in checking criminalization for own\nvested interests.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Other judgements\nby SC on issue of criminalisation of politics:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li><strong>In&nbsp;Union\nof India (UOI) v. Association for Democratic Reforms and Anr,&nbsp;2002,<\/strong> the\nSC held that that every candidate, contesting an election to the Parliament,\nState Legislatures or Municipal Corporation, has to declare their criminal\nrecords, financial records and educational qualifications along with their\nnomination paper.&nbsp;<\/li><li><strong>In Ramesh\nDalal vs. Union of India,&nbsp;2005,<\/strong> the SC held\nthat a sitting MP or MLA shall also be subject to disqualification from contesting\nelections if he is convicted and sentenced to not less than 2 years of\nimprisonment by a court of law.&nbsp;<\/li><li><strong>In&nbsp;Lily\nThomas v. Union of India,&nbsp;2013,<\/strong> the SC held\nthat that Section 8(4) of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 is\nunconstitutional which allows MPs and MLAs who are convicted to continue in\noffice till an appeal against such conviction is disposed of. The court held\nthat MP\/MLA convicted for two years or above would be disqualified immediately.<\/li><li>In\n2017, the Central Government informed SC that lawmakers convicted in any\ncriminal case would not stand automatically disqualified.&nbsp;A convicted\nlawmaker may move the appellate court to get the conviction stayed thus\nallowing him or her to continue.<\/li><li><strong>In&nbsp;Krishnamurthy\nv. Sivakumar &amp; Ors., 2015, <\/strong>the SC held that disclosure of\ncriminal antecedents (especially heinous crimes) of a candidate at the time of\nfiling of nomination paper as mandated by law was a categorically\nimperative.&nbsp;<\/li><li><strong>In&nbsp;Public\nInterest Foundation &amp; Others Vs Union of India,&nbsp;2018,<\/strong> left\nthe matter of disqualification of politicians&nbsp;carrying criminal charges\nagainst them, to the Parliament saying that the court cannot add to the grounds\nof disqualification.&nbsp;<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Directions\nissued in 2018:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>While\nfilling the nomination forms, candidates must declare their criminal past and\nthe cases pending against them in bold letters.<\/li><li>Political\nparties are also responsible for putting up details of criminal cases filed\nagainst their candidates on their websites.<\/li><li>Candidate\nand the concerned political party will have to issue a declaration in widely\ncirculated newspapers in the locality and in electronic media about his or her\ncriminal antecedents<\/li><li>Parliament\nmust legislate on the matter to ensure that candidates with criminal\nantecedents do not enter public life or become lawmakers<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Election\nCommission\u2019s views:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>EC expressing its views told the court\nthat increase in the number of MPs having pending criminal cases was\n&#8220;disturbing&#8221; and as per the statistics, there were 43 per cent MPs in\nParliament who have criminal cases against them.<\/li><li>The Election Commission has also agreed\nwith the suggestion that political parties may be asked to furnish details on\nits website regarding criminal antecedents of candidates and give reasons as to\nwhy he or she has been given the ticket.<\/li><li>However, the EC had said it was not\nagreeable to the suggestion regarding penalising the political party or its\ncandidates under Article 324 of the Constitution for their failure to disclose\ncriminal antecedents, as it does not have this power.<\/li><li>Acting on the previous recommendation of\nSC (2018),&nbsp;the EC had issued the notification regarding the amended\nForm-26 and directions to political parties and candidates for publication of\ncriminal antecedents.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Important\nRecommendations:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li><strong>Election\nCommission Recommendations:<\/strong>&nbsp;The Election Commission in\nits&nbsp;\u201cProposed Electoral Reforms\u201d (2016)&nbsp;recommended that persons\ncharged with cognizable offences&nbsp;should be de-barred&nbsp;from contesting\nin the elections, at the stage when the charges are framed by the competent court\nprovided the offence is punishable by imprisonment of at least 5 years, and the\ncase is led at least 6 months prior to the election in question.<\/li><li><strong>2nd\nARC Recommendations:<\/strong>&nbsp;The Second Administrative Reforms\nCommission in its fourth report on Ethics in Governance (2008) made the\nfollowing recommendations:<\/li><li>Section\n8 of RPA needed to be amended&nbsp;to disqualify all persons facing charges\nrelated to grave and heinous offences and corruption, where charges have been\nframed six months before the election.<\/li><li>It\nalso supported the proposal of including filing of&nbsp;false affidavits as an\nelectoral offence&nbsp;under Section 31 of Representation of the People Act,\n1950.<\/li><li><strong>The\nLaw Commission in its 244th report on Electoral Reforms<\/strong>\ntitled&nbsp;\u201cElectoral disqualifications\u201d&nbsp;had put forward recommendations\non de-criminalization of politics. The main recommendations include:<\/li><li>Expediting\ntrials&nbsp;in relevant courts where a case is led against a sitting MP\/MLA and\nto conduct the trial on a day-to-day basis with an outer limit of completing\nthe trial in one year.<\/li><li>Retroactive\napplication- from the date the proposed amendments come into effect, all\npersons with criminal charges (punishable by more than five years) pending on\nthat date are liable to be disqualified subject to certain safeguards.<\/li><li>The&nbsp;punishment\nfor filing false affidavits&nbsp;under Section 125A is increased to a minimum\nof two years, and that the alternate clause for shall be removed.<\/li><li>Conviction\nunder Section 125A should be made a&nbsp;ground for disqualification&nbsp;under\nSection 8(1) of the RPA, 1951.<\/li><li>The\nfiling of false affidavits should be made a&nbsp;corrupt practice&nbsp;under\nSection 123 of the RPA.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Way Forward:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>The <strong>Election\nCommission <\/strong>must take adequate measures to break the nexus between the\ncriminals and the politicians. The most important step in this direction would\nbe checking the use of black money in party and election funding.<\/li><li><strong>Intra-party\ndemocracy<\/strong>\nshould be strengthened for better scrutiny and selection of candidates.<\/li><li>A <strong>strong\npolitical will<\/strong> is required on the part of government to decriminalize the\nentire political system by enactment of required legislations and taking\nadequate measures.<\/li><li>Politics can only be decriminalized\nthrough larger <strong>public awareness and\npublic participation<\/strong> in elections, politics and governance. Further,\nelectoral process should be made more inclusive through wider participation\nfrom all sections of the society<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Source: <\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.hindustantimes.com\/editorials\/disentangling-politics-and-crime\/story-t03y9gNYNYXaq9WQbImt5L.html\">https:\/\/www.hindustantimes.com\/editorials\/disentangling-politics-and-crime\/story-t03y9gNYNYXaq9WQbImt5L.html<\/a><strong><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Context: SC verdict on criminialisation of politics. More in news: A two Judge Bench of Supreme Court recently delivered a Judgment on the contempt petitions regarding the&nbsp;criminalisation of politics in India.&nbsp; Criminalisation of politics in India: Criminalization of politics means the rising participation of criminals and people facing criminal charges in politics. The term indicates&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/7-pm-disentangling-politics-and-crime14th-february-2020\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">7 PM |Disentangling politics and crime|14th February 2020<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":61,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[130,955],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-54423","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-7-pm","category-7-pm-brief-infograph","entry"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","views":{"total":0,"cached_at":"","cached_date":1704808546},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54423","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\/61"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=54423"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54423\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=54423"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=54423"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=54423"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}