EDEN IAS

Anti-defection law

UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS | NO NEED TO AMEND ANTI-DEFECTION LAW AS IT STOOD THE TEST OF TIME, LAW MINISTER TELLS RAJYA SABHA | 23RD JULY | THE HINDU

SYLLABUS SECTION: GS II (POLITY AND GOVERNANCE)

WHY IN THE NEWS?

Recently, Law Minister says in-house mechanism sufficient to deal with objectionable remarks made by judicial officers or a judge. Anti-defection law encouraged group defections to bring down the strength of an Assembly and facilitate a government change.

MORE DETAILS:

  • Thus, the law is seen ineffective in ensuring stability of the elective government
  • Meaning of the term ‘merger’ in anti-defection law is ambiguous.
  • Legislators interpreted for themselves the term ‘merger’ to mean the merger of two thirds of legislators and that the merger of their original party is not necessary.
  • Experts believe that if there is no merger of the original party, then these dissidents cannot claim any exception from disqualification no matter whether strength is.
  • Speaker or chairpersons of the legislatures makes the final decision on defection.
  • However, this power is subject to judicial review (Kihoto Hollohon Vs Zachilhu, 1992).
  • Law does not provide a time-frame within which Presiding officers has to decide on anti-defection case.

ANTI DEFECTION:

  • It was introduce in 1985 with a view to curb the tendency among legislators to switch loyalties from one party to another and facilitate the toppling of regimes and formation of new ones.
  • Anti-defection law provided for the disqualification of legislators belonging to a political party if they voluntarily gave up membership of their party or defied whip of their party by voting contrary to its directions.
  • However, if two-thirds of the members agree to a merger with another party, they will not be disqualified.

Read more: UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS

SOURCE: THE HINDU

This will close in 0 seconds