dna edit: Ordaining with disdain

The government’s use of the ordinance route to amend The Representation of the People’s (RP) Act and negate the Supreme Court ruling disqualifying convicted legislators smacks of ad-hocism. The amendment bill is presently before a parliamentary standing committee after the BJP, which supported its passage in the Rajya Sabha, had a surprising change of heart. Before the monsoon session commenced, outraged political parties converged at an all-party meeting where they backed the government’s plan to nullify the SC judgment.

The plot developed accordingly until the BJP diverged from the script in the Lok Sabha. But two developments since then seem to have forced the political consensus to further unravel and the BJP and the Congress to pull in opposite directions.

Congress Rajya Sabha member Rasheed Masood’s conviction in a corruption case by a Delhi court and the impending judgment in the 1996 fodder scam case in which UPA ally Lalu Prasad Yadav is an accused has inconvenienced the Congress more than the BJP. 

The BJP sees the ordinance push, without waiting for the standing committee to return the bill, as an opportunity to embarrass the government. Ironically, the BJP’s Rajya Sabha leader Arun Jaitley and law minister Kapil Sibal sounded uncannily alike when the bill unanimously sailed through the Rajya Sabha. Both were at the forefront of a ferocious onslaught on the judiciary accusing it of undermining the government, Parliament, politicians and policy-making. But the BJP is hardly better placed; a serving minister in Narendra Modi’s cabinet was recently convicted.

Interestingly, politicians — opposed to the SC ruling — raised the bogey of victimisation by political rivals, rather than the courts. Politicians’ distrust of each other stems from the awareness that nobody’s hands are clean. While striking down Section 8(4) of the RP Act as unconstitutional, the Supreme Court was clear that the provision allowed privileges to politicians unavailable to the ordinary citizen. Unlike the political class which has hardly taken any meaningful steps towards ending criminalisation of politics, the SC ruling would eliminate at least a few criminal elements from the many sitting legislators facing serious criminal charges. By no stretch of imagination are the cases against Masood or Lalu an instance of political vilification. Masood’s continuance as an MP despite being convicted is a travesty of justice and an insult to the Constitution of India.

Another issue is the UPA’s tendency to use backdoor entries bypassing Parliament. The convenience that executive orders and ordinances accord often borders on the unconstitutional. This is evident in the way Aadhaar was forced upon citizens without consulting Parliament. The ball is now in Pranab Mukherjee’s court. A consummate politician, President Mukherjee is yet to become the inspirational figure that APJ Abdul Kalam was, or display the independence that characterised KR Narayanan’s tenure.

In 1986, Zail Singh used his pocket veto by withholding assent to the Indian Post Office (Amendment) Bill which he felt allowed indiscriminate interception of postal communications. President Singh was proved right when the subsequent VP Singh government withdrew the bill. If President Mukherjee’s convictions force him to oppose the ordinance, he will not be alone. The Aam Aadmi Party and the Biju Janata Dal have wholeheartedly supported the SC ruling.