There's a bomb ticking under every political party in the country, waiting to go off. Like the atom bomb, this one too gets its destructive potential from its ability to engender splits -- in this case, breakaway groups within parties. The unedifying events in Uttar Pradesh seem to have made politicians of every hue conscious of the dangers of harbouring such a bomb. The Congress, for one, now evidently very aware of its fissile nature, has even tried to nudge the Gujral government into passing an ordinance designed to plug the loopholes in the 1985 Anti-defection Act. There is, of course, rich irony in a party which has in the past played floor-crossing games with panache suddenly ringing the alarm bells on that score. Be this as it may, reviewing the anti-defection law promulgated by the Rajiv Gandhi government 12 years ago, has become an absolute necessity in an era when cynical self-gratification rather than commitment to party ideologies seems to drive legislative and parliamentary behaviour. The 1985 legislation provides for the disqualification of members who either voluntarily leave the party or do not support the party whip while voting in the House, unless they together make up one-third of the party's total membership. The recent UP events demonstrated that such a stipulation is no real deterrent to floor-crossing.

Every party has suffered because of the inadequacies of the Act, whether it is the BJP when it was outmanoeuvred by Gujarat's Shankersinh Vaghela a year ago, or NTR's TDP, when his son-in-law walked off with a major chunk of the parent party. Therefore the all-party meet to review it, which has been scheduled for November 10, makes eminent sense. There are several aspects to be considered about an issue that has been debated from the late 1960s, when Indira Gandhi engineered the first split in the Congress and changed the parameters of Indian politics forever. A committee appointed in 1967 had urged that defectors should not be given ministerial status, or any public office, for a period of one year. It also demanded a ceiling on the size of state and Union cabinets, which it said must not exceed 10 per cent of the strength of the Lower House. While these are valuable suggestions and have some deterrent value, they may not be adequate, especially since cash blandishments are also a powerful incentive for floor-crossing. Former Prime Minister V.P. Singh's suggestion that defectors must be made to go back to the electorate and get re-elected on their own terms, seems to make more sense. This would recognise the important principle that political candidates win on the basis of not just their individual but their party agendas. The other aspect that needs to be debated concerns the role of the Speaker. Since the post has become extremely politicised, it is arguable whether a Speaker can conduct himself as an impartial judge in disputes arising out of defections.

Some anxiety has been voiced over changing the Anti-defection Act on the ground that the right to dissent within a party is part of democratic functioning. But none of the amendments suggested here militates against democratic principles. Indeed, they are further reinforced because it will be the people who get to decide whether they wish to have their candidate in the political garb that he or she is presently donning.

Copyright © 1997 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.