QUES . The role of individual MPs (Members of Parliament) has diminished over the years and as a result, healthy constructive debates on policy issues are not usually witnessed. How far can this be attributed to the anti-defection law, which was legislated but with a different intention? UPSC 2013 G S MAINS PAPER 2
HINTS:
The Tenth schedule to the Constitution, popularly referred to as the Anti defection law was inserted by the 52nd amendment in 1985. It aims to curb political instability by preventing elected representatives from switching parties.
To a certain extent the act has prevented defections but with the advent of this law the standards of debates and discussions are on decline.
Must read: Anti-defection law: Purpose and Evaluation
How Anti-Defection Law diminished the role of individual MPs?
֍ The bossism and whip culture has got legal sanction and as a result individual MP’s of the parties cannot show dissent which is the essence of representative democracy. The dissent has been equated with the defection.
֍ The anti-defection law removes the need for the government to build a broad consensus for its decisions. The ruling party can ensure the support of each of its MP by issuing a whip. If it needs to build further support to get a majority it only needs to convince the leaders of other party and not individual MPs. In a sense the role of an MP is diminished to just a person who has to follow orders from the party bosses.
֍ The fear of disqualification under the anti-defection law discourages MPs from openly voicing dissenting opinions against party leadership or party’s stand on various policy issues. This hampers healthy intra-party debates, leading to a fossilized view on policy matters that may not truly reflect the diversity of opinions within the party.
֍ It increased the accountability of individual M.P toward party at cost of his accountability to its electors at times. He has to stand by the party even if the party’s decisions is in conflict with general public interest.
֍ Parliament can be effective only if individual MPs have a significant role as a law makers, and if they can be held accountable for their actions by their electorate. The anti-defection law breaks this accountability link between the elected representative and the voter. Legislators can now claim that they voted in a particular manner because their party required them to do so and therefore ought not to be held accountable for it.
Must read: SC’s Kihoto Hollohan order of 1992
However, there are other reasons as well for lack of constructive debates in parliament:
֍ The lack of interest or intellectual abilities of M.Ps can be other reason for there less active role in policy debates.
֍ Also the quality of people joining politics had declined sharply over the years as established by the fact that First Lok Sabha was the most educated one till date.
֍ Lack of intra party democracy. Centralization in political parties and high command culture.
֍ Proliferation of regional parties. Powerful regional leaders now form their own regional parties instead of remaining in the main party and voicing their own opinion.
֍ Disconnect between political leaders and electorate.
֍ Nepotism, dynasty culture etc.
Anti-defection law does’t mean that a MP has been left with no means to express or influence the party’s attitude and decisions and is puppet in the hands of high command. M.P’s can do that outside the Parliament in official party meetings and via intra- party resolutions and exchange of ideas platforms.
So we can say that the decline in role of Individual M.Ps in Parliament can be attributed to Anti defection laws but is definitely not the only reason. But still some measures can be taken.
What can be done?
֍ Anti-defection law should be applied only to confidence and no-confidence motions (Dinesh Goswami Committee on electoral reforms, 1990) or only when the government is in danger (Law Commission (170th report, 1999).
֍ Nowadays, no real democratic discussions happen inside political parties about major issues affecting the country. Individual MPs and MLAs need to be empowered to think independently.
This only shows that the law needs a relook in order to plug the loopholes if any. But it must be said that this law has served the interest of the society. Political instability caused by frequent and unholy change of allegiance on the part of the legislators of our country has been contained to a very great extent. That is a story of success of one of the most important legislation that the Indian Parliament has enacted.
External link: https://loksabhadocs.nic.in/Refinput/New_Reference_Notes/English/15072022_111659_1021205175.pdf
