Parliament and state legislatures and RPA Flashcards
Code of Conduct For Politicians?
- A Code of Conduct for members of Rajya Sabha has been in force since 2005; there is no such code for Lok Sabha. In the case of MPs, the first step was the constitution of Parliamentary Standing Committees on Ethics in both Houses.
- A code for Union ministers was adopted in 1964, and state governments were advised to adopt it as well.
- A conference of Chief Justices in 1999 resolved to adopt a code of conduct for judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts — this 15-point ‘Re-instatement of Values in Judicial Life’ recommended that serving judges should maintain an air of “aloofness” in their official and personal lives.
origin of live telecast of parliament proceedings?
- LSTV was the brainchild of former Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee.
- earlier select parliamentary proceedings had been televised since December 20, 1989 eg. Presidential address
- When the DD News channel was launched, Question Hour in both Houses started getting telecast simultaneously on DD channels.
- after a decade, in December 2004, that a separate dedicated satellite channel was set up for the live telecast and in 2006, LSTV started airing the proceedings of the Lower House live.
- RSTV was launched in 2011
- The Union Budget allocates funds for the running of channels.
- Recently LSTV and RSTV have been merged into a single ‘Sansad TV’
Registration of Political parties is governed by the provisions of?
Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
“The transparency in electoral funding has regressed in recent times”?
Intro: Feb 2017, Arun Jaitley (FM): without transparency of political funding, free and fair elections are not possible
- electoral bonds: earlier every transaction of more than Rs 20,000 was reported to EC. Now even Rs 20 crore or Rs 200 crore could be donated anonymously. The reason given was that the donors want secrecy. It is, clearly, a case of private interest in conflict with public interest in transparency. both the RBI and ECI registered their strong protest. ECI warned that it may lead to mushrooming of shell companies and funnelling of black money in electoral process.
- Finance Act 2017 introduced amendments in the RBI Act, Companies Act, Income Tax Act, RPA and FCRA to cause further damage. Through an amendment to the Finance Act 2017, the Centre exempted political parties from disclosing donations received through electoral bonds.
- limit of 7.5 per cent of its profits which a company could donate, was removed. Even a loss-making company could make political donations, leading to crony-capitalism.
- requirements for a resolution by the board of directors for a company to make donations to PPs and to declare the political donations in the profit and loss accounts were also removed. Thus even shareholders weren’t privy to political donation activities.
- Section 29B of RPA 1951 prohibited all PPs from accepting any contri from a “foreign source”. similar prohibitions by FCRA. Government passed a retroactive amendment through a 2016 Finance Bill that amended the statute.
- SC in 2021 flagged the “no regulation of end use” of electoral contri via the anonymous electoral bonds. This money can be used to disturb the law and order as well as in horse-trading activities after the polls.
Parties need to set up examples by disclosing the donations it receives. eg, Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) became the first party to do so recently
issue with exemption ofAssam, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura (i.e. Sixth schedule states) from Citizenship amendment Bill?
Sixth schedule is a way to protect distinct culture and way of life. It has nothing to do with separate citizenship regimes. Seems like a purely political exemptions
How can Parliamentary committees be made more effective?
- national commission to review the working of the Constitution has recommended that in order to strengthen the committee system, research support should be made available to them. 2. mandatory scrutiny of all bills by parliamentary committees would ensure better planning of legislative business. 3. during a meeting of chairpersons of the committees with Rajya Sabha chairman M Venkaiah Naidu recently, a view emerged that persistent absenteeism from meetings of department-related standing committees should cost MPs their spot on these parliamentary panels
expenditure cap in elections:recent context? present caps?
- A pvt member bill recently asks for removal of ceiling on election expenses as it encourages candidates to under-report 2. LS: 70L; SLA: 28L
Various Recommendations by committees on Anti-defection law?
- Dinesh Goswami Committee on electoral reforms: Disqualification should be limited to following cases:
- A member voluntarily gives up the membership of his political party
- A member abstains from voting, or votes contrary to the party whip in a motion of vote of confidence or motion of no-confidence. Political parties could issue whips only when the government was in danger.
- Law Commission (170th Report):
- Provisions which exempt splits and mergers from disqualification to be deleted.
- Pre-poll electoral fronts should be treated as political parties under anti-defection.
- Political parties should limit issuance of whips to instances only when the government is in danger.
- EC: Decisions under the Tenth Schedule should be made by the President/ Governor on the binding advice of the Election Commission.
Rule 266 and 267 of the Lok Sabha?
Rule 267 states that committee meetings have to be held in the Parliament building. However, the Speaker has the powers to change the venue.
Rule 266 mandates that all committee meetings have to be held in private.
Context:
Rajya Sabha secretariat has denied permission for members of the standing committee on Home Affairs to join a meeting of the panel through videoconference. The reason videoconference meetings were not being allowed was because it violated the principle of confidentiality, as there was no guarantee of a member sitting alone at such events.
Rule 266 and 267 of the Lok Sabha?
Rule 267 states that committee meetings have to be held in the Parliament building. However, the Speaker has the powers to change the venue.
Rule 266 mandates that all committee meetings have to be held in private.
Context:
Rajya Sabha secretariat has denied permission for members of the standing committee on Home Affairs to join a meeting of the panel through videoconference. The reason videoconference meetings were not being allowed was because it violated the principle of confidentiality, as there was no guarantee of a member sitting alone at such events.
Parliamentary privileges: relevant Consti and legal provisions?
Parliamentary privileges are defined in Article 105 of the Indian Constitution and those of State legislatures in Article 194.
Besides, Rule No 222 in Chapter 20 of the Lok Sabha Rule Book and correspondingly Rule 187 in Chapter 16 of the Rajya Sabha rulebook govern privilege.
SC’s recent observations on Tenth schedule functioning?
- SC suggested a mechanism outside the Parliament/SLAs eg. a permanent tribunal headed by a retired Supreme Court judge or a former High Court Chief Justice as a new mechanism. This would require an amendment to the Constitution.
- Speakers should decide Tenth Schedule disqualifications within a “reasonable period”. What is ‘reasonable’ would depend on the facts of each case. Court held that unless there are “exceptional circumstances”, disqualification petitions under the Tenth Schedule should be decided by Speakers within three months.
Representation of Peoples (RP) Act provisions to curb Criminalization of politics? SC’s efforts in this regard?
RPA provisions
- lawmakers cannot contest elections only after their conviction in a criminal case.
- Section 8 of the Representation of the People (RP) Act, 1951 disqualifies a person convicted with a sentence of two years or more from contesting elections. But those under trial continued to be eligible to contest elections. The Lily Thomas case (2013), however, ended this unfair advantage.
SC’s efforts:
- In 2002, it made it obligatory for all candidates to file an affidavit before the returning officer, disclosing criminal cases pending against them.
- The famous order to introduce NOTA was intended to make political parties think before giving tickets to the tainted.
In LIly Thomas judgement in 2013, SC ruled that any MP or MLA or MLC who is convicted of a crime and given a minimum of two year imprisonment, loses membership of the House with immediate effect. This is in contrast to the earlier position, wherein convicted members held on to their seats until they exhausted all judicial remedy in lower, state and SC.
Further, Section 8(4) of the RPA, which allowed elected representatives three months to appeal their conviction,was declared unconstitutional
- In its landmark judgment of March 2014, the SC accepted the urgent need for cleansing politics of criminalisation and directed all subordinate courts to decide on cases involving legislators within a year, or give reasons for not doing so to the chief justice of the high court.
- IN jan 2020, SC asked the EIC to come up with a framework which can contribute towards the larger issue of containing the entry of candidates having criminal background into politics.
- In Feb 2020, Supreme Court had directed political parties to publish the criminal history, if any, of their election candidates on the homepage of their websites under the caption ‘Candidates with criminal antecedents’ within 48 hours of their selection.
- In Aug 2021, a three judge bench of SC procalimed that-“No prosecution against a sitting or former MP/MLA shall be withdrawn without the leave of the HC”
Criminalisation of Politics: stats?
- There are a total 4,442 cases pending against legislators across the country. Of this, the number of cases against sitting Members of Parliament and members of State legislatures was 2,556.
- The cases were pending in various special courts exclusively set up to try criminal cases registered against politicians.
- The cases against the legislators include that of corruption, money laundering, damage to public property, defamation and cheating.
- A large number of cases were for violation of Section 188 IPC for wilful disobedience and obstruction of orders promulgated by public servants.
- There are 413 cases in respect of offences, which are punishable with imprisonment for life, out of which in 174 cases sitting MPs/ MLAs are accused.
- A large number of cases were pending at the appearance stage and even non-bailable warrants (NBWs) issued by courts have not been executed.
Star campaigners?
- A recognised political party can have 40 star campaigners and an unrecognised (but registered) political party can have 20.
- The list of star campaigners has to be communicated to the Chief Electoral Officer and Election Commission within a week from the date of notification of an election.
- The expenditure incurred on campaigning by such campaigners is exempt from being added to the election expenditure of a candidate. However, this only applies when a star campaigner limits herself to a general campaign for the political party she represents.
- If a candidate or her election agent shares the stage with a star campaigner at a rally, then the entire expenditure on that rally, other than the travel expenses of the star campaigner, is added to the candidate’s expenses.
- Even if the candidate is not present at the star campaigner’s rally, but there are posters with her photographs or her name on display, the entire expenditure will be added to the candidate’s account.
- This applies even if the star campaigner mentions the candidate’s name during the event. When more than one candidate shares the stage, or there are posters with their photographs, then the expenses of such rally/meeting are equally divided between all such candidates.