Supreme Court Asks Election Commission: "Provide Details On Removal Of Convicted Politicians"

The Supreme Court asked the Election Commission to reveal cases where it reduced or removed disqualification of convicted leaders. It also questioned how criminals can return to politics.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Supreme Court Asks Election Commission: "Provide Details On Removal Of Convicted Politicians"

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India asked the Election Commission of India (ECI) to share details of cases where it has either removed or shortened the disqualification period of political leaders after their conviction in criminal cases.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan has directed the Election Commission to provide this information within two weeks. The court wants details of instances where the Election Commission used its authority under Section 11 of the Representation of People Act (RPA), 1951 to cancel or reduce the disqualification period.

ALSO READ: “Dawood Ibrahim Would Contest Election”: Delhi HC Rejects PIL for Jailed Politicians to Campaign for Elections

Under the RPA, when a person is convicted of a crime and sentenced to at least two years in jail, they are barred from contesting elections from the date of conviction. This disqualification continues for six years after their release, even if they are out on bail or appealing their conviction. However, under Section 11 of the RPA, the Election Commission has the power to reduce or completely remove this disqualification period if it provides valid reasons.

The court stated that PIL petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay and others would have two weeks to respond after the Election Commission submits the details.

The PIL (Public Interest Litigation) was originally filed in 2016 by advocate Ashwani Dubey. It demands a lifetime ban on convicted politicians and also calls for faster disposal of criminal cases against Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs).

ALSO READ: [Poll Battles] Can Politicians in Jail Contest Elections?| Eligibility to Participate but Not Vote

During the hearing, it was noted that a similar petition by NGO Lok Prahari is already pending before another bench. Justice Dipankar Datta suggested that Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna should consider merging both cases and assign them to a single bench. The court also said that once the CJI gives his decision, the case should be listed for hearing without delay.

In the discussion, senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, acting as amicus curiae (a neutral legal expert assisting the court), pointed out that there is no publicly available data on the Election Commission’s decisions to remove or reduce disqualification of convicted politicians. He urged the court to obtain these details.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, representing the petitioner, emphasized the need to stop criminal elements from entering politics. He also reminded the court that the Election Commission itself had once stated that individuals with criminal charges should not be allowed to contest elections.

ALSO READ: Centre Opposes Plea in Supreme Court: “6-Year Ban For Convicted Politicians Enough, Lifetime Ban Too Harsh”

The lawyer representing the Election Commission assured the court that the commission has no objection in providing the requested information. He also clarified that Section 11 of the RPA is not being challenged in this case.

The Central Government, however, strongly opposed the petition. It argued that the decision to impose a lifetime ban on convicted politicians is something that only Parliament can decide.

In its affidavit, the Centre stated that the petition was trying to change the law or force Parliament to create a new law, which is beyond the powers of the judiciary.

“The question whether a life-time ban would be appropriate or not is a question that is solely within the domain of the parliament,”

-the affidavit said.

It further explained that penalties are always time-bound and that this is an established legal principle worldwide. The government also argued that it is not unconstitutional to allow politicians to return after a certain period of disqualification.

ALSO READ: “Politicians Assuring Death Penalty For Culprits Fuels ‘Mob Rule’ in India”: SC Judge Justice Abhay Oka

On February 10, the Supreme Court had asked both the Central Government and the Election Commission to respond to a petition challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 8 and 9 of the Representation of People Act.

Highlighting the issue of “criminalisation of politics,” the Supreme Court raised an important question: