|
It’s
over: Jayalalitha can’t contest polls
Express News
Service
Chennai,
April 24:
AIADMK supremo J. Jayalalitha will not be able to contest the Tamil
Nadu assembly polls scheduled for May 10. Returning Officers (ROs)
of all four constituencies — Andipatti, Krishnagiri, Bhuvanagiri
and Pudukottai — where Jaya had hoped to contest from rejected
her nomination papers today. They cited a 1997 Election Commission
directive which says no candidate who has been convicted for more
than two years of imprisonment will be allowed to contest polls.
Angry AIADMK cadre staged demonstrations in the state but no untoward
incidents have been reported so far. Heavy security has been deployed
in the state.
|
WHAT CAN JAYA DO NOW
|
|
 She
will have to wait till the declaration of results to file
an election petition before the High Court challenging the
rejection of her nomination. Under Section 100(1)(C) of the
Representation of People Act, the court can declare an election
void if "any nomination has been improperly rejected"
She may
ask the EC to overrule the decisions of the ROs but will not
get any relief because the EC has no power to interfere in
such a matter. And the ROs anyway acted according to the EC's
own circular of 1997 which bars convicted persons from contesting
She can campaign for other candidates
and become chief minister, subject to the condition that she
gets elected within six months. She can then attempt to get
the 1997 circular out of her way by challenging its constitutionality
in court
|
In Andipatti,
which had once elected MGR, the RO) S. Jaya formally announced the
rejection of Jaya’s nomination papers on the grounds that the
AIADMK leader, who had been convicted for more than two years in
two corruption cases (Tansi land deal cases), was disqualified from
contesting the election as per Section 8(3) of the Representation
of the People (RP) Act. The RO stated that the EC’s 1997 guidelines
said the nomination of a candidate convicted for more than two years
was liable to be rejected if the conviction was not stayed. She
also said four sets of nominations have been filed by the candidate
in the same constituency which was in violation of the provisions
of the RP Act.
Jayalalitha’s
candidature was opposed by N Sekar, counsel for DMK nominee Assaiyan,
and Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy, the agent for his
candidate V.S. Chandralekha, a former IAS officer, who were also
candidates from this constituency.
Nominations
of 23 other candidates, including those filed by sitting member
Assaiyan (DMK) and Chandralekha (JP), were found in order. Soon
after the RO announced the rejection of Jayalalitha’s papers,
Swamy said Chandralekha would withdraw from the contest. April 26
is the last date for withdrawal of nominations.
Madhivanan,
RO of Krishnagiri, also cited Section 8(3) of RP Act besides citing
the 1997 guidelines. The ROs in Pudukottai and Bhuvanagiri also
rejected the nominations on the ground that the papers were filed
in violation of Section 33(7)(B) of the RP Act.
Earlier in
the day, eminent jurist and former Chief Minister of West Bengal
Siddhartha Sankar Ray, former Union Minister M. Thambidurai and
present AIADMK candidate for Bargur assembly segment, former Industries
Secretary V. Selvaraj, and others presented Jaya’s case before
the RO.
It’s over:
Ray argued that since the Madras High Court, by its order dated
November 3, 2000, had suspended the sentence of Jaya’s imprisonment,
the disqualification under Section 8(3) of the Representation of
People Act 1951 was not relevant.
Ray argued
that the Madras High Court while rejecting the prayer of stay of
the operation of her conviction made it clear that in view of the
order of suspension of her sentence she was not disqualified to
contest this very election.
Thus, it could
be safely held that the conviction and sentence were inseparable
twins in the eye of law. The moment the sentence was suspended,
conviction was deemed to have been suspended. Otherwise, the framers
of the code would have taken care to provide for stay of conviction
of suspension of conviction, he said.
Ray argued
that it had to be remembered that under Sub Sections (2) and (3)
of Section 8 of the RP Act 1951, the emphasis was only on sentence
and not conviction and ‘‘the disqualification arises when
only where the person is sentenced to imprisonment for not less
than two years under sub-section (3) of Section 8 of the R.P.Act
1951. It is the sentence that disqualifies but not the offence.
If the sentence of imprisonment is suspended, I do not think that
there may be any disqualification for a person to contest in the
election. In this case, sentence of imprisonment has already been
suspended. Under such circumstances, in my view, there may not be
any disqualification for the petitioner to contest in the election,’’
Ray said.
Tension gripped
Theni town (near Andipatti) and Krishnangiri after the ROs announced
the rejection of Jaya’s nomination papers.
As a precautionary
measure, police forces including companies of Swift Action Force,
Central Industrial Security Force, Central Reserve Police Force
and Tamil Nadu Special Police force have been deployed in sensitive
areas.
Anticipating
trouble, Chief Minister Karunanidhi cancelled his election tour
in Krishnagiri scheduled on Wednesday.
|
