The order of the Rajasthan High Court asking for status quo on the Rajasthan Assembly Speaker’s disqualification notice to the dissident Congress lawmakers seems to have triggered a debate within the Congress on the broader issue of the Anti-Defection Law (ADL), technically known as Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, as well as political parties regularly approaching the courts to fight their battles.
Judicial indiscipline: On Rajasthan political crisis
Former Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal, who is arguing for the Rajasthan Assembly Speaker C.P. Joshi in the Supreme Court, on Saturday told The Hindu that the ruling BJP is using the Tenth Schedule to ‘destabilise’ elected Congress governments in the State and called for amending some provisions.
In a series of tweets, former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram, who is a Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court, referred to court orders on the Tenth Schedule and asked people to judge for themselves.
“In 1992, the Supreme Court ruled: “Having regard to the constitutional scheme in the Tenth Schedule, judicial review should not cover any stage prior to the making of a decision by the Speakers/Chairmen; and no quia timet actions are permissible. Those words are simple and clear enough. That statement of the law by 5 judges was binding on all courts, HC or SC. Now, dear average citizen, you be the judge,” Mr. Chidambaram said on twitter.
Supreme Court refuses Rajasthan Speaker’s plea against High Court order
In Rajasthan, where the Congress claims to have a majority, senior legal minds of the party argue that a Court cannot issue quia timet orders or an injuction in anticipation of an action by the Speaker.
However, when Assembly Speakers have ‘inordinately delayed’ their decision on disqualification petitions filed by the Congress, the party had moved courts to seek directions.
In the past six years, the Congress has witnessed mass desertions by legislators in States like Goa and Manipur immediately after being elected on a party ticket or have lost governments in Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh through mass resignations.
“The government is using the Tenth Scehdule to destabilise governments. So, it should be amended and some provisions added. First, a disqualification petition must be mandatorily decided, irrespective of whether a legislator has resigned or not. Two, if one is disqualified, he should be barred from any public office for 5 years. And three, a person who stands disqualified should be barred from contesting not just a by-election but the next election as well,” Mr. Sibal said.
With political authorities approaching the courts too often, another senior leader and also former law minister Ashwani Kumar, focussed on the delicate balance of power between constitutional authorities.
“Politics should work itself out on the floor of the House or in the peoples’ Court. Political moralities cannot be enforced by constitutional courts. This is the lesson of the working of the current Anti-Defection Law which needs to be revisited. A situation in which political parties have to repeatedly knock at the door of Law courts has weakened the political institutions of democracy and has upset the balancing of constitutional power,” Mr. Kumar said.
Talking about the face-off between Rajasthan Governor and the State government, he said, “The Governor’s decision to not honour the State Cabinet’s decision to convene the Assembly session is contrary to established constitutional position and conventions and will escalate inter institutional conflict”.
