Remember during the election, everyone is talking about how our democratic system is turning into a presidential sort of race, centred around a "Leader". It's not just rhetoric but the actual scenario in India. Why, Anti Defection Law.
Behind all the legal terms [Click here], the basic aim of it is to stop the horse trading that is happening in Indian political scenario leading to weak government [Read 80's, 90's]. So Rajiv Gandhi passed this amendment to constitution when he had more than 400 members of Lok Sabha.
The raises the questions, Do we truly have a parliamentary, representative democracy. But lets not push the blame to Rajiv Gandhi for this change, because practically there never has been change.
Indian leaders such as Nehru, however accommodative people say he was, was immensely popular to the extent that there was clear association with him and the party and this was continued by the party. The only chance we had at an truly democratic structure was gone with Shastri and the brief rule by Janata government.
Good news:
- Even though law wanted to keep the speaker decision out of the purview of the court, SC deemed it unconstitutional.
- Recently when 4 JD[U] leaders did not vote according to party whip, they were defected.But this defection was overturned by Patna High court stating and forming a precedent by pointing out the difference between "Dissent" and "Defection".
Note:
- Before recommending a change in anti defection policies, think about the repercussion it might have on practically everything from domestic to foreign policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment