(MENAFN- Gulf Times) Prima facie it holds out mouthwatering prospects. Imagine the corrupt and the criminalised among India's politicians you and I know there is no dearth of them being brought to justice in double-quick time. Who wouldn't want to throw the rascals out? Or, better still, into jails where they should be.
The Supreme Court last week asked the Narendra Modi government to submit within six weeks plans to set up fast track courts to adjudicate criminal cases against politicians.The two-man bench comprising Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Navin Sinha said: 'Insofar as setting up of special courts are concerned, setting up of special courts and infrastructure would be dependent on the availability of finances with the states...the problem can be resolved by having a central scheme for setting of courts exclusively to deal with criminal cases involving political persons on the lines of the fast track courts which were set up by the central government.
When Additional Solicitor-General Atmaram Nadkarni said he would need at least six weeks to come up with a plan, the court readily agreed and fixed the next hearing for December 13.
The statistics are simply frightening. Of the nearly 5,500 legislators in all the state assemblies and the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha combined, as many as 1,581 members have criminal cases against them, murder and rape included. Corrupton, of course, is all-pervading. In the present Lok Sabha, with a current strength of 538, those facing criminal charges number 185, or a little more than 34%.
The court was hearing a petition filed by Delhi-based lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay demanding life ban for politicians convicted in criminal cases.The Election Commission of India (ECI) voiced its support for the petitioner. The Law Commission, too, had recorded its support for life ban much earlier. Under the present law, a legislator is debarred from contesting elections for six years if he/she is convicted of heinous or moral crimes. Bihar's Lalu Prasad Yadav and Tamil Nadu's Sasikala Natarajan are prime examples of those serving six-year bans.
The criminal-politician nexus has been in vogue in India for decades. In fact, many criminals take to politics and win elections too to whitewash their real profiles and backgrounds. Prime Minister Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has always given 'winnabilityof a candidate additional weightage, thereby brushing aside the 'criminality of his past deeds. The induction of Mukul Roy, who recently resigned from the Trinamool Congress, and Narayan Rane, who is about to be inducted into the Devendra Fadnavis government in Maharashtra, are the latest examples of the BJP's ‘antecedents-be-damned' approach to electoral politics.
Several regional parties, notably from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, turn a blind eye to the misdeeds of a politician if he/she can bring in votes and, in many cases, money too. In these states criminal records of candidates are often held up as assets! The Association for Democratic Reforms has found that candidates with criminal charges were twice as likely to win as those with a clean record. Intimidation and inducements could be the main reasons for this but it also shows how deep the rot has set in.
But in July 2013, the Supreme Court ordered that those sentenced to prison terms for two years or more will automatically face a six-year ban from contesting polls post-release. When the court started hearing Upadhyay's petition to convert the six-year ban into a lifelong one, the Modi government opposed it saying the prevailing law was good enough to curb 'the entry of persons with criminal antecedents into political arena. It was plain as daylight there was no truth in the government's contention.
The previous Congress Party-led United Progressive Alliance government was none the better though in keeping the criminals out. When the court ordered the six-year ban, the government of Manmohan Singh tried to circumvent it by introducing a bill in parliament that sought much lighter punishment for lawmakers. And when it failed to muster opposition support, the government came up with an ordinance which Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi, in a rare moment of bravado, famously tore up at a press conference in Delhi in September 2013. Manmohan Singh meekly surrendered to the wishes of the Gandhi scion and decided to squash the ordinance. While what Gandhi did was quite extraordinary, even remarkable, it further showed up the Congress Party's disintegration that eventually culminated in the miserable defeat in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections.
The Supreme Court obsevered last week that 'it takes years, probably decades, to complete a trial against a politician. By which time, he would have served as a minister or legislator several times over. The second Administrative Reforms Commission had noted as long ago as 2005 that the 'opportunity to influence crime investigations and to convert policemen from being potential adversaries to allies is the irresistible magnet drawing criminals to politics.
Now the highest court in the country is considering banning politicians for life if they are found guilty. And to add to that welcome step the court is further contemplating fast-tracking such cases where politicians could be banned for life. Nothing could be better for Indian politics if the two proposals take effect. This should keep political parties on the straight and narrow path eschewing criminals when it is time for ticket distribution for elections.
But the court must be aware that this is a double-edged sword. Naturally, the ends of justice will not be met until the very last page is turned. Most cases will end up in the Supreme Court itself. Fast-tracking a case has in-built flaws that could be exploited by litigants. Indian politics has sunk to such low levels that frivolous cases against lawmakers could be one way of jettisoning a genuine candidate out of the election fray.
So, side by side with the fast-track courts, the government should also be asked to frame laws that provide for stringent punishment to those who indulge in character assassination. This could be imprisonment for a very long time or, if the litigant is another politician, life ban from politics if the case falls through for lack of proof.
But the problem may not end there. Fast track courts have been functioning for nearly a decade now. But it came to light a couple of years ago that nearly 50% of these courts are there just to make up the numbers as they have been rendered out of commission for lack of judges and other supporting staff. Several states have given little importance to these courts and at last count nearly 700,000 cases were pending.
India's judiciary has been handicapped on several fronts. Lack of quality judges is perhaps more acute than lack of judges. Because they have to cater to the vote-bank politics, all political parties are keen to maintain and even increase the quota of reservation for lower caste Hindus and minorities in every sphere of education and employment. The result: merit gets sidelined even as mediocrity rules. Natually, quality of judges, or for that matter that of doctors, engineers et al, takes a dip as each year passes.
Banning a politician for life after a quick trial is no child's play. Such a verdict calls for deep knowledge of the law. If the Supreme Court delegates its best judges to sit in judgment of cases against politicians, what will happen to the ordinary woman's appeal? While the prospect of seeing a corrupt, criminal politician behind bars and eventually out of society altogether is a salivating one, it should not be at the cost dispensation of justice for Indians in general.
MENAFN0711201700670000ID1096053075
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.