Why can't EC link parties' recognition with bar on those with criminal past: SC
New Delhi, Aug 21 : The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the government if it can direct the Election Commission to include in the symbol order a clause that a political party is liable to lose its recognition if it fields candidates with criminal antecedents.
"Why can't we exhort Parliament like the Law Commission does to address the problem? Why can't we take clue from Section 33A of the Representation of People Act and direct the Election Commission to include in Symbol order a stipulation to bar people with criminal antecedents from electoral fray?" the court asked.
"Without asking the legislature (to make a law), you are asking the Election Commission (to insert addition qualifications)," Attorney General K.K. Venugopal said.
The top court, he said, could exhort Parliament to enact a law to bar the people with criminal background from the electoral fray, but any expansion of the Symbols Order that would have a bearing on the recognition of political parties would be ultra vires.
The five-judge constitution bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Fali Nariman, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice Indu Malhotra is hearing a plea by NGO Public Interest Foundation seeking to bar people from electoral politics against whom charges have been framed by trial courts for heinous offences.
The Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 says that a party would be recognized as a national party if it has fielded candidates in any four or more states, in the last general election to Lok Sabha or the legislative assembly and has secured 6% of the valid votes polled in each of the four states.
Besides this, the party has to secure four seats in the Lok Sabha from either one state or all the four states.
Informing the court about the presumption of innocence till an accused is convicted, Venugopal said excluding a person, charged with a criminal offence yet not convicted from the election fray would amount to adding another disqualification.
"It will be ultra vires," Attorney General said as Justice Chandrachud asked: "Is there anything that prevents the Election Commission from introducing additional qualifications? Can't EC incorporate such provisions in its rules?"
The constitution bench is hearing a reference by a three-judge bench on the question "whether disqualification for membership can be laid down by the court beyond Article 102(a) to (d) and the law made by Parliament under Article 120(e)?"
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Lok Sabha confirms imposition of President's rule in Manipur
_vb_75.jpeg)
New Delhi (PTI): The Lok Sabha early Thursday adopted a Statutory Resolution confirming the imposition of President's rule in Manipur with opposition supporting the decision but slamming the Centre for the situation in the state.
Replying to a short debate, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said the government has taken all possible steps to bring back normalcy in the restive northeastern state.
He said there has been no violence in Manipur in the last four months, adding that talks were on with both Meitei and Kuki communities for a peaceful solution.
"By and large the situation is peaceful. As long as people are in camps, I would not say the situation is satisfactory. The government is taking all possible steps to restore peace in Manipur," he said.
The home minister said the ethnic violence in Manipur had started following an order of the state's high court.
"The day the order came, we sent the central forces by air. There was no delay on our part (in taking action)," he said.
He said, so far, 260 people have died in the violence that started in May 2023 and 80 per cent of them lost their lives within the first month.
Shah said he did not want to compare the violence that had taken place during the tenure of the previous governments but wanted to tell the House about the clashes between the Naga and Kuki communities that took place in the 1990s over five years.
"Sporadic violence continued for a decade where 750 people lost their lives. There were Kuki-Paite clashes in 1997-98 when 352 people were killed. In the Meitei-Pangal clashes in the 1990s, over 100 people died. Neither the then prime minister nor the then home minister visited Manipur," he said.
The home minister said an impression has been given that violence erupted only during the BJP rule, which is not correct.
Earlier, participating in the debate, Congress leader Shashi Tharoor said his party supported the resolution but wanted the restoration of peace and stability in the state.
"End insurgency, restore peace and stability, promote dialogue with each other, promote inclusivity," he said.
Sayani Ghosh of the Trinamool Congress said her party too supports the resolution but favours early restoration of peace.
DMK's K Kanimozhi said "divisive" politics should come to an end in Manipur.
"We want normalcy to return, peace and harmony should be restored. We also want the formation of an elected government," she said.
Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Arvind Sawant expressed concern over the prevailing situation in Manipur and said peace must be restored.
NCP (SCP) member Supriya Sule said the President's Rule is not good for democracy and sought "strong intervention" of the home minister in bringing back normalcy.
The resolution 'Consideration on the Proclamation issued by the President on the 13th February 2025 under article 356 (1) of the Constitution in relation to the State of Manipur’ was adopted by the House by a voice vote.
The violence started after a 'Tribal Solidarity March' was organised against the high court order.
There have been many efforts from the central government to bring the warring communities to the negotiating table.
