Contents
- Sharpen the anti-defection law, strengthen democracy
- Fair trade
Sharpen the anti-defection law, strengthen democracy
India’s anti-defection law, which was first introduced in 1985, was intended to reduce legislators’ frequent party shifts in order to improve government stability and safeguard democratic integrity. Although initially successful, it has recently revealed flaws and implementation problems resulting in misuse and delays. The law needs specific reforms to fix these gaps and improve enforcement in order to achieve its goals.
Relevance: GS2 (Indian Polity )
Practice question: Discuss the significance of anti-defection law considering India’s political scenario . Suggest key measures to check defections. (250 words)
Background of anti-defection law :
Early Defections:
- India post-independence witnessed very frequent defections which destabilised state governments
- The term “Aaya Ram, Gaya Ram” originated in Haryana in the 1960s, when legislator Gaya Lal switched parties multiple times in a single day.
52nd Amendment (1985):
- Anti-defection law under the 10th schedule was introduced to check defection.
- It established grounds for disqualification of Members of Parliament and State legislatures on the basis of defection.
- Grounds of disqualification: Voluntarily giving up party membership or Disobeying party whips on key issues like confidence motion and budgets.
- Loophole: Allowed party splits if one-third of the party’s legislators defected, which resulted in mass defections
91st Amendment (2003):
- Addressed loophole of the 52nd amendment by requiring at least two-thirds of party legislators to approve a merger to prevent mass defections.
- Amendments were successful in checking small-scale defections.
Key Challenges in the Current Law :
Delay in decision-making by the speaker:
- No time limit for Speakers to decide on defection cases.
- Delays allow defectors to hold office, weakening the law’s purpose.
Opaque Party Whip System:
- Lack of clarity in whip communication allows ambiguity in defection cases.
Judicial Review Limitations:
- In order to respect legislative autonomy, the court rarely intervenes in defection cases.
- Speaker discretion unchecked due to Limited judicial oversight.
Proposed Amendments :
Time frame for Decision-Making:
- Introduce a four-week time limit for the Speaker to decide on defection cases.
- If decisions were not made in 4 weeks, defecting members were deemed to be disqualified.
- Ensures timely decisions, preventing misuse of office.
Transparent Party Whips:
- Require public notice of whips through newspapers or electronic media.
- Increases accountability and ensures clear communication with legislators.
Independent Tribunal for Defection Cases:
- Supreme Court recommended a tribunal to handle defection cases in Keisham Meghachandra Singh vs. Manipur Speaker (2020).
- A tribunal would reduce Speaker bias and strengthen impartiality.
Recommendations from Key Committees :
Dinesh Goswami Committee (1990) :
- Disqualification for Defectors: Recommended that disqualification should apply only in cases of defection involving voting against party lines on key issues like no-confidence motions.
- Role of Presiding Officer: Suggested minimising the role of the Speaker in deciding defections to reduce partisan bias.
- proposing a separate independent tribunal for deciding on defection.
Law Commission Reports (1999, 2015) :
- Independent Adjudicatory Body to decide on disqualification cases.
- Strengthening Disqualification Rules: Advised that all cases of defection, including mass defections, should result in disqualification
- Penalty Mechanisms: Proposed provisions to impose penalties on defectors and discourage “political horse-trading.”
National Commission to Review the Constitution (2002)
- It called for timely legislative reforms and Recommended limiting the application of the party whip
Need for Political Will :
- Bipartisan efforts from leaders of the house and leaders of the opposition are necessary.
- Reforms would align with “One Nation, One Election” for a stable and mandate-driven governance.
Conclusion
A stronger anti-defection law is need of the hour to protect electoral integrity and uphold democratic stability. through amendments like Setting time limits, making whips public, and introducing a tribunal can ease the issue.
Fair Trade
Context: The 29th Conference of Parties (COP29) in Baku will focus on climate finance and carbon markets, emphasising the need for clear regulations.
Relevance: GS 3 (Environment )
Practice Question: Explain the importance of carbon trading policy in countering climate change. Suggest key challenges and measures. ( 250 words )
Carbon Markets:
- Carbon markets facilitate the trading of carbon credits, which represent a reduction or removal of greenhouse gases. They operate under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.
Article 6 of the Paris Agreement
- Allows countries to trade credits generated through renewable energy shifts or ecosystem conservation.
- Contains guidelines for validating carbon reduction activities and setting up bilateral agreements for emission claims across countries.
Challenges Faced:
- Carbon markets have struggled with transparency and effectiveness, often criticised for creating an illusion of real emission reductions.
- Verification of credits remains a significant concern.
Expectations from COP29:
- There is hope that COP29 will clarify regulations, encouraging countries like India to claim legal carbon credits and actively participate in trading.
India’s Commitments:
- India aims to achieve 50% of its electricity from non-fossil sources by 2030.
Role of the Private Sector :
- Private enterprises are innovating in forestry projects that sequester carbon, generating credits for multinational companies. This encourages voluntary carbon markets in India.
Impact on Key Industries:
- Major industries, such as iron and steel, must meet emission intensity standards by 2025, laying the foundation for India’s carbon market.
Compliance Challenges:
- Historical experiences indicate that companies may not feel sufficient pressure to comply with carbon reduction mandates, complicating the effectiveness of these markets.
Need for a Transparent Policy:
- Developing a fair and transparent carbon trade policy is crucial for establishing credibility. This requires alignment with international standards and robust verification processes.
Collaboration for Success:
- Cooperation between government agencies and research institutions is essential to create effective carbon accounting systems and innovative solutions.
Conclusion:
India’s carbon trade policy must prioritize transparency and fairness to harness climate action benefits fully. Ensuring international comparability in carbon market standards will make India a credible participant in global carbon trade.
