|
PIL
urges EC not to accept papers of convicted
Express News
Service
Chennai,
April 16:
A WRIT plea has been filed in the Madras High Court to restrain
Returning Officers (ROs) under control of the Election Commission
(EC) from accepting nomination of any candidate convicted and disqualified
under any provision of Sections 8(1-3) of the Representation of
People Act (RPA) in the ensuing Assembly polls in Tamil Nadu.
The bench comprising Chief Justice N.K. Jain and Justice K. Sampath,
before which the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) from Voice (Consumer
Care Council) came up for hearing on Monday, posted the matter till
April 20.
Voice founder trustee, K.M. Vijayan, said the petition was necessary
in view of the ‘‘confusion’’ prevailing in the
minds of administrators of election law.
The petitioner said that disqualification under sections 8(1) to
(3) of the RPA could not be stayed against the object of the Act
and should therefore be implemented to promote the object of probity
in public life and to prevent criminalisation of politics —
irrespective of pendency of any appeal, suspension of a sentence
or stay of conviction under the relevant provisions of the CrPC.
It also asked for a direction to the ROs to strictly comply with
the orders of the EC relating to disqualification of a candidate.
The petitioner said the sections made it very clear that neither
a pending appeal nor the stay of sentence or conviction should come
in the way of enforcing the provisions enacted to preserve probity
in public life.
On August 29, 1997, the EC issued orders which stated that persons
convicted of criminal offence, even if the appeal was pending with
a stay, should not be permitted to contest. And the ROs were expected
to follow the orders in strict terms. However, the petitioner contended
that Justice Malai Subramanian’s judgement in the case dated
April 11, 2001 on former chief minister and AIADMK general secretary
J Jayalalitha’s appeal, raised contradictory conclusions.
The judgement created confusion in the minds of the authorities
whether to follow the law as available in Sec 8(3) and interpreted
by the Supreme Court or to discard the judgement of this court as
a mere obiter and reject it.
|
