Cases against MPs and MLAs - Supreme Court's observations

Criminalisation of politics needs to be tackled urgently, and decisively. But who'll bell the cat?

 Cases against MPs and MLAs - Supreme Court's observations

---

• The story: In August '21, in a major development on criminalisation of politics, the Supreme Court ordered certain limitations on governments' powers to withdraw such cases against MPs-MLAs.
• The background: In August 2020, Karnataka government decided to drop charges in 61 criminal cases, several of which involved elected representatives and ministers. The Karnataka HC restrained the state government from acting on that order, and rejected on the ground that the courts are duty-bound to assess whether prima facie a case is made or not.

1. Principles behind HC’s order - Due process to be followed in criminal cases involving members of the political class. Public prosecutors had the right to disagree when governments invoked Article 21 of the CrPC to withdraw criminal cases. The SC endorsed the HC’s stance in restoring public prosecutor’s autonomy and has held the following limitations
2. SC said that power to withdraw cases "cannot be used for political purposes.” No prosecution against a sitting or former MP/MLA shall be withdrawn without the leave of the high court. The court can scrutinize the nature and gravity of the offense to determine if the withdrawal of the prosecution would subserve the administration of justice.

• Importance: Governments often overlook the primacy of public interest in favoring members of ruling parties or alliances. Money and muscle power in politics continue to undermine democracy. This criminalisation of politics has been going on since 1980s, resuting in serious concerns raised by both the ECI (Election Commission of India), and the Supreme Court (SC). But nothing material happened at the parliamentary level.
• Promises: Various leaders kept promising decisive action against criminals in politics, but the percentage of elected representatives with criminal background kept rising. Various governments in the States and Centre have failed to abide by the SC’s 2020 directive.
• 2020 directive: Political parties to publicly disclose the criminal antecedents of candidates put up by them in elections to Parliament and state assemblies. This directive enables voters to have all necessary information, for them to exercise their right to franchise in an effective manner.
• What next: Addressing the “disease of criminalization of politics” and ensuring cleaner politics call for far-reaching changes in the system, is now needed. But who will bell the cat? Not the politician, for sure.

 

Join PT courses | PT Youtube | PT App | Contribute |  Testimonials