Political hustlers over the years have evolved a new practice to bring down the government.
They have displayed an uncanny flair to subvert the Anti-Defection law to their advantage.
What is the new practice?
It is now no longer necessary for the party in opposition to bring down a government by splitting the ruling party.
This was a practice that this law had effectively curbed by mandating that two-thirds of the legislators have to leave in order for it to be a legitimate split.
The new-age hustlers circumvent this provision by getting the required number of ruling party legislators to resign.
This shrinks the size of the House to the extent that the opposing party numbers form the majority.
What is an example?
In Karnataka, last year 17 MLAs from Congress, JD (S) and one provincial party resigned.
This adequately shrank the size of the House for the BJP party to gain majority.
Of 17 MLAs who toppled the Congress-JD (S) coalition government, 14 were re-elected to the Legislative Assembly on a BJP ticket.
The Speaker disqualified the MLAs under the 10th Schedule, barring them from seeking re-election for the entire term of the Assembly.
What did the SC rule on the Karnataka crisis?
The Supreme Court (SC) had rejected the ruling of the Speaker of the Karnataka Assembly.
Indeed, the Speaker had exceeded his ambit here as the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951 does not provide for such disqualification.
But the Supreme Court can create the law here if it so chooses.
What did the SC do previously?
The SC has effectively amended the RPA law earlier in an attempt to reform the political arena.
In Lily Thomas case (2013), it had ruled that a member of any legislature who is convicted of a crime involving 2 years imprisonment, loses membership of the House.
What could be done?
Barring the legislators from seeking re-election for an entire term of the Assembly would check smartly engineered defections.
There is a need for a legal solution to the political cynicism of the day.
