CONVICTED
PERSON CONTEST ELECTION : POLITY
NEWS: Should
convicted persons be allowed to contest elections?
WHAT’S
IN THE NEWS?
The Supreme Court of India is
deliberating on petitions seeking a lifetime ban on convicted individuals from
contesting elections, amid concerns about the criminalization of politics, with
a significant number of elected MPs having criminal cases.
Background
of the Issue:
- Current Legal Framework: Section 8(3) of the
Representation of the People Act, 1951, disqualifies convicted individuals
from contesting elections if they are sentenced to at least two years in
prison, extending the disqualification for six years post-release.
Supreme Court's Involvement:
The Court is reviewing
petitions that argue for extending these disqualifications to impose a lifetime
ban on convicted individuals from electoral participation.
Criminalization
of Politics:
- Statistics: According to a report by The Association for
Democratic Reforms (ADR), nearly 46% of the MPs elected in 2024 have
criminal cases against them, with 31% facing serious charges like murder
and rape.
- Impact on Electoral Success: Candidates with criminal
backgrounds have a higher chance of winning elections compared to those
with clean records.
Arguments
For a Lifetime Ban:
- Preserving Integrity: Advocates argue that
allowing convicted criminals to hold office undermines the integrity of
the political system.
- Enhancing Public Trust: Barring criminals from
elections could restore public trust in the electoral process and
governance.
- Safety and Justice: A ban could prevent
individuals with violent or corrupt pasts from affecting citizen safety
and social justice.
Arguments
Against a Lifetime Ban:
- Democratic Rights: Opponents claim that
convicted individuals should retain their right to participate in
democracy, including running for public office.
- Rehabilitation: There is an argument that
individuals who have served their sentences and reformed should not be
perpetually barred from contributing to public life.
- Legal and Ethical Concerns: Concerns about overreach and
the potential misuse of legal provisions to sideline political opponents.
Relevant
Legal Precedents and Recommendations:
- Past Supreme Court Judgments: Key cases like the ADR case
(2002) and Lily Thomas case (2013) have shaped the legal landscape by
requiring candidates to disclose criminal records and disqualifying
convicted legislators immediately upon sentencing.
- Law Commission and Election Commission
Recommendations:
Both bodies have repeatedly suggested reforms to reduce criminal elements
in politics, including disqualifying candidates facing serious charges,
although these suggestions have faced political resistance.
Current
Developments:
- Supreme Court's Action: The Court has sought the
Central government and Election Commission's response on the matter,
reflecting its significance in ongoing judicial deliberations.
Source: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/should-convicted-persons-be-allowed-to-contest-elections-explained/article69212513.ece