Question 1 · 10 marks · 168 words written
There is a need to resolve the ambiguity in the disqualification provisions under section 8 of the Representation of People Act 1951. Discuss. (Answer in 150 words) 10 marks.
Opening
The Representation of People Act 1951 (RoPA) deals with the conduct of elections to the Parliament and SLA.
Sec 8 of RoPA → deals with disqualification of MPs and MLAs on conviction for certain crimes. Eg: Rahul Gandhi
Body · points
Ambiguities
(1) Sitting vs Others → immediate disqualification for others while 3 months time period for sitting legislators.
(2) Art 103 → President shall decide on the disqualification on advice of ECI, but Sec 8 doesn't mention.
(3) Discretion of ECI → to remove or reduce the period of disqualification. (Section 11)
(4) Stay on conviction → effect retrospectively or prospectively.
(5) Silent on procedure to reinstate.
Need to Resolve
→ ensure level playing field for all candidates. (Art 14)
→ strict timeline for by polls, removing confusion
→ ADR: 45% of total legislators have criminal cases.
Way Forward
(1) Lily Thomas case (2013) → immediate disqualification.
(2) Need for proper deliberation
Close · a way forward
through multiple stakeholders.
Thus, to ensure representative democracy, there is a need to resolve these ambiguities.