Crime and politics: on political candidates with criminal records (Indian Express)

• Mains Paper 2: Polity 
• Prelims level: Representation of the People Act 1951
• Mains level: Reasons for still prevailing criminalization of Politics

Context:

• The Supreme Court has recently agreed to hear a plea from the Election Commission
• of India (ECI) to direct political parties not to field candidates with criminal antecedents.
• Supreme Court has passed successive series of landmark judgments to bar criminal candidates from contesting but the extent of the problem has not been eliminated entirely.
• A recent report stated that 1. 46% of Members of Parliament have criminal records.
• Current cohort of Lok Sabha MPs has the highest (29%) proportion of those with serious declared criminal cases.

What does this indicate?

• These unhealthy tendencies in the democratic system reflect a poor image of the nature of India’s state institutions and the quality of its elected representatives.
• This is a consequence of a structural problem in Indian democracy and the nature of the Indian state.

Landmark judgements by Supreme Court to curb criminalisation of politics:

• In 2013 Lily Thomas vs. Union of India case, Supreme Court removed the statutory protection of convicted legislators from immediate disqualification.
• In 2014, SC directed the completion of trials involving elected representatives within a year.
• In 2017, it asked the Centre to frame a scheme to appoint special courts to exclusively try cases against politicians.
• In Public Interest Foundation vs. Union of India, 2018 Supreme Court asked the political parties to publicise pending criminal cases faced by their candidates.

Reasons for still prevailing criminalization of Politics:

Lack of political will:

Representation of the People Act, 1951, deals with disqualification of candidates against whom charges have been framed in court for serious offences. Therefore, in order to curb criminalisation of politics, Parliament needs to bring an amendment in the Act.
The parliament is yet to frame a law that is deterrent to legislators with dubious credentials.

Money power:

• Candidates with serious records seem to do well largely due to their ability to finance their own elections and bring substantive resources to their respective parties.
• The report by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and the National Election Watch (New) found that a candidate with a clean record has 12 per cent chance of winning the election whereas for a candidate with a criminal record, the chance of winning is 23 percent.

Narrow prism view:

• Some voters tend to view such candidates through a narrow prism of being able to represent their interests by any possible means.

Left out with no choice:

• As all competing candidates have criminal records voters are left with no choices but to select any of them.

Way forward:

• While judicial pronouncements on making it difficult for criminal candidates to contest are necessary.
• Only enhanced awareness and increased democratic participation could create the right conditions for the decriminalisation of politics.

Online Coaching for UPSC PRE Exam

General Studies Pre. Cum Mains Study Materials

Prelims Questions: 

Q.1) With reference to the India- Russia energy ties, consider the following statements:
1. Indian Oil Corp (IOCL) recently signed a deal with Russia’s Rosneft for the annual purchase of 2 million metric tonnes of Urals grade crude oil from Rosneft.
2. The crude oil, being sourced under the contract, will be loaded in Suezmax vessels at Novorossiysk port of Russia and will come to India, bypassing Straits of Hormuz.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both  
(d) None
Answer: C

Mains Questions: 
Q.1) What are the reasons behind for still prevailing criminalization of politics?