Question: Anti-Defection Law (Tenth Schedule) — provisions, judicial oversight, and parliamentary ethics
Introduction
The Tenth Schedule, inserted by the 52nd Constitutional Amendment (1985), addresses the menace of political defection that destabilises governments and erodes electoral mandates. Its effective enforcement remains central to legislative accountability.
Body
1. Speaker's Authority and Judicial Review
The Tenth Schedule vests disqualification decisions in the Speaker or Chairman, but the Supreme Court in Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992) held that this decision is subject to judicial review on grounds of mala fide, perversity, or violation of natural justice. The Speaker's ruling is therefore not absolutely final, contrary to a common misconception.
2. Voluntary Surrender of Party Membership
A member who voluntarily gives up membership of their political party attracts disqualification under the Schedule. Courts have interpreted 'voluntary giving up' broadly — conduct inconsistent with party membership, even without formal resignation, can constitute grounds for disqualification.
3. Applicability to Both Houses
The Tenth Schedule applies to members of both Houses of Parliament and both Houses of State Legislatures, including Rajya Sabha and State Legislative Councils. The claim that it excludes Upper Houses is incorrect.
4. Merger Provision
A merger is recognised under the Schedule only when at least two-thirds of the legislature party's members agree to it. This threshold prevents small splinter groups from engineering defections under the guise of a merger, reinforcing party discipline.
5. Structural Weakness: Speaker's Conflict of Interest
A persistent governance concern is that the Speaker, belonging to the ruling party, adjudicates defection cases involving potential allies. Proposals to vest this power in an independent tribunal or the Election Commission remain under active constitutional debate.
Conclusion
The Tenth Schedule balances party cohesion with democratic representation, but its efficacy depends on impartial adjudication. Institutional reform of the adjudicatory mechanism is essential to prevent the law from becoming an instrument of political convenience.
Word count: 266
PYQ 2024
Which of the following statements about the Ethics Committee in the Lok Sabha are correct?
1. Initially it was an ad-hoc Committee.
2. Only a Member of the Lok Sabha can make a complaint relating to unethical conduct of a member of the Lok Sabha.
3. This Committee cannot take up any matter which is sub-judice.
Select the answer using the code given below:
PYQ
With reference to the Ethics Committee of the Rajya Sabha, consider the following statements:
1. The Ethics Committee of the Rajya Sabha was constituted in 1997, making it the first such committee in either House of Parliament.
2. A complaint against a member can be filed by any citizen of India.
3. The Committee examines complaints only after the member concerned has been given an opportunity to be heard.
4. The quorum of the Committee is one-third of its total membership.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
PYQ
Consider the following statements about the Joint Sitting of both Houses of Parliament under Article 108:
1. A joint sitting can be convened to resolve a deadlock over Money Bills.
2. The joint sitting is presided over by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha.
3. A bill passed at a joint sitting is deemed to have been passed by both Houses separately.
4. No amendment can be proposed to a bill at a joint sitting that was not proposed in either House previously.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
PYQ
With reference to the conduct of Members of Parliament, which of the following statements is/are correct?
1. The Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament has been specifically enacted by a statute passed by Parliament.
2. The Ethics Committee of Lok Sabha was made a permanent Standing Committee by the Lok Sabha Rules Committee in 2015.
3. A member found guilty by the Ethics Committee is automatically expelled from the House.
4. The Ethics Committee can take suo motu cognizance of any unethical conduct by a member.
PYQ
Which of the following statements about the Departmentally Related Standing Committees (DRSCs) of Parliament is/are correct?
1. DRSCs were first set up in 1993 and now cover all Central Government Ministries/Departments.
2. DRSCs examine the Demands for Grants of the concerned Ministries before they are voted upon in the Lok Sabha.
3. A Minister can be a member of a DRSC.
4. The reports of DRSCs are binding on the respective Ministries.
Select the correct answer using the code given below: