Defections are the bane of Indian polity. From the time the Congress party lost its pre-eminent position in the late 1960s, defectors have decided the fate of many Governments.

Neither morality nor law have failed to rein in defections and it would appear that most legislators would readily join any political formation ~ even with a diametrically opposite ideology ~ provided the right incentives are offered. Like business executives who switch companies for better pay and perks, politicians of today do not mind changing parties for ‘better prospects.’

Advertisement

Anti-defection laws were enacted to deter such opportunism but politicians and political parties are always a step ahead of the law; despite rampant defections, few defectors, if any, have paid a penalty for their misdeeds. The reason is not far to seek. Money power is often the deciding factor in elections; extra-large electorates, both in terms of population and area, combined with the expectation of gifts of money, freebies and liquor by electors ensures that all serious candidates have to spend huge sums, which are to be recouped before the next election.

Consequently, corruption and defection are a given in contemporary polity. The most famous defector of the twentieth century was Winston Churchill, who switched parties three times in his political career; from the Conservatives to the Liberals in 1904, from the Liberals to being an independent in 1922, and back to the Conservatives in 1924. Though, ideological concerns were also behind Churchill’s party-hopping, the predominant reason for changing parties was his massive ego and his hankering for the top job. Creditably, the British Parliament has had less than ten defectors in the last century.

On the other hand, we had more than our fair share of defectors, sometimes called Aya Ram Gaya Rams in honour of one Gaya Lal, an independent Haryana MLA of 1967 vintage, who first joined the Congress, and thereafter changed parties thrice in a fortnight. First by defecting from the Congress to the United Front, then back to Congress, again defecting, within nine hours, to the United Front. When Gaya Lal finally defected from the United Front to the Congress, Congress leaders declared “Gaya Ram is now Aya Ram.”

Some consummate weathervanes like the late Ram Vilas Paswan, managed to bag a ministerial post in every dispensation. However, in similar circumstances, Mr Paswan’s son has failed to emulate his father, showing that being a successful defector is an art that cannot be practised by everyone. It is estimated that almost 50 per cent of the 4,000 MLAs and MPs elected in the 1967 and 1971 elections subsequently defected, leading to political turmoil in most States of the country.

Recognising the menace of defections, in 1976, a committee was formed under the chairmanship of YB Chavan. The anti-defection legislation proposed by the Chavan Committee, was referred to a Joint Select Committee (JSC). The Bill lapsed because the JSC did not submit its recommendations within the currency of the Fifth Lok Sabha. Three years later, defection of 76 MPs led to the fall of the Janata Government. It fell to Rajiv Gandhi to amend the Constitution and place antidefection provisions in the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, but the law failed to stop the defection of Chandrashekhar and 61 of his followers from the Janata Dal, in 1990. Though the Speaker disqualified eight MPs, Chandrashekhar, went on to become Prime Minister and the defectors became ministers, and were relieved of their offices only after a public outcry.

Anti-defection provisions were made more stringent by the 91st Amendment to the Constitution in 2003, yet defections continue even today. Post-2014, the BJP, with a desire to acquire an all-India footprint in the shortest possible time has encouraged defections, which have ballooned, aided in part by the dwindling fortunes of the Congress, which has made many Congress stalwarts jump ship. This trend has gained momentum in the last one year with regional parties trying to grow into national-level parties, by occupying the space vacated by the Congress.

Copying the BJP model, the TMC and AAP are banking fully on defectors in Goa. Defectors have seldom got their just desserts ~ aided as they are by sharp lawyers, partisan Governors and Speakers, a somnolent judiciary and an absence of public disapproval.

Apparently, no stigma attaches to defections in the public mind, because most turncoats who resigned from the Gujarat, MP and Karnataka assemblies in the last two-three years were re-elected by their constituents. Of course, defectors contend that anti-defection laws stifle their right to free speech, glossing over the fact that they are not individuals with a free will but representatives of an electorate that voted for them on the basis of certain assurances ~ including that of party affiliation.

Seen in this perspective, defection is an act of betrayal of the people’s trust. Governors have encouraged defections; after State elections in Goa (2017), Manipur (2017) and Meghalaya (2018) the Congress emerged as the largest party, yet, ignoring the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission which mandated that the largest party be called first to form the Government, the BJP was called to form the Government, which it managed through defections. Sikkim presents an interesting case study.

BJP did not win a single seat in the 2019 State Elections and got only 1.6 per cent of the overall vote, yet with the aid of defectors, BJP now has emerged as the main opposition party. The CM of Sikkim is a person convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act and hence not eligible to hold a ministerial post. An unprecedented situation has emerged in Nagaland where all MLAs have come together to have a Legislative Assembly without any Opposition member ~ a scenario beyond the comprehension of constitutional experts. Before every vote of confidence in an Assembly, legislators are whisked away to far-off resorts in friendly States and guarded day and night against blandishments held out by opposite parties. Sometimes, enforcement agencies chip in to frighten the detainees.

The success of such measures determines whether the government survives or falls. Increasingly common, such antics are a blot on our democracy. As soon as elections are announced, we have the unseemly spectacle of legislators of the ruling party, who have enjoyed the perks of office for the last five years finding fault with their party, and an equal number of MLAs from Opposition ranks trying to defect to the ruling party, in anticipation of the loaves and fishes of ministership. The West Bengal elections firmly established this template, which is now being faithfully followed in the ongoing State Assembly elections.

However, unlike earlier elections, the defection game is equally poised, with a significant number of defections from the BJP to other parties in Goa and UP. In fact, Akhilesh Yadav announced that he would not admit any more defectors from BJP. Thus far, the anti-defection law has been unable to stop defections because of the rapacity of legislators and the pursuit of power at any cost by political parties. As things stand, Speakers, who are interested persons belonging to the ruling party, keep disqualification petitions pending, till some Court directs them to expedite their decision.

Courts, in turn, do not take up disqualification petitions till the life of the Assembly gets over, consequently, such pending petitions are often dismissed as ‘infructuous.’ The introduction to the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution reads: “The evil of political defections has been a matter of national concern. If it is not combated, it is likely to undermine the very foundations of our democracy and the principles which sustain it. With this object, an assurance was given in the address by the President to Parliament that the government intended to introduce in the current session of Parliament an anti-defection Bill. This Bill is meant for outlawing defection and fulfilling the above assurance.”

It would appear that anti-defection legislation has only partially achieved its purpose because in the ultimate analysis, defection is more of a political and moral problem that cannot be solved by purely legal means. Perhaps, the law can be made more effective by constituting a Tribunal to decide upon disqualification of legislators. Additionally, timelines can be prescribed for various authorities to decide disqualification petitions. However, the problem of political defections would persist till we have legislators who are of sterling character and electorates that are not well-disposed towards defectors. Till that time, only imperfect solutions can be tried out to curb defections.

(The writer is a retired Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax)