The automatic disqualification of elected officials who are found guilty and given prison sentences of more than two years was contested in a petition to India’s Supreme Court. Rahul Gandhi, the leader of the Congress, was disqualified from serving in the Lok Sabha, prompting the filing of the petition.
According to the petition, it is against the principles of natural justice to impose a general disqualification regardless of the type, importance, and severity of the violations.
The Representatives of the People Act, 1951 (1951 Act), Section 8 (3), which stipulates the disqualification, is said to be in violation of the Indian Constitution in the petition. According to the petition, Section 8(3) prohibits members from freely performing the tasks that their individual constituency’s voters have delegated to them, which is against the principles of democracy.
Even while the 1951 Act clearly classifies the acts for the purpose of disqualifying members of Parliament based on the nature of the offenses, Section 8(3) calls for a general automatic disqualification.
It contends that the legislature’s goal in passing the aforementioned 1951 Act was to bar elected officials who had been convicted of grave or heinous felonies from holding office.
The petition further emphasises how the Code for Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) defines the ‘Classification of Offenses’ and divides offences into those that are cognizable and those that are not, as well as between those that are and are not subject to bail. As a result, it stipulates that in certain situations, the grounds for disqualification must be particular and relate specifically to the types of offences listed in the CrPC rather than being general.
The petition says that a member’s representation is the right of freedom of speech and expression of millions of supporters who have elected the member in that constituency and voters who have voted for the political party, highlighting the fact that members of parliament are the ‘voice of the people.’
Post Your Comments