Criticism

Though the anti-defection law been hailed as a bold step towards cleansing our political life and started as new epoch in the political life of the country, it has revealed may lacunae in its operation and failed to prevent defections in toto. It came to be criticised on the following grounds:

1. It does not make a differentiation between dissent and defection. It curbs the legislator’s right to dissent and freedom of conscience. Thus, 'it clearly puts party bossism

on a pedestal and sanctions tyranny of the party in the name of the party discipline’4 .

2. Its distinction between individual defection and group defection is irrational. In other words, 'it banned only retail defections and legalised wholesale defections’5 .

3. It does not provide for the expulsion of a legislator from his party for his activities outside the legislature.

4. Its discrimination between an independent member and a nominated member is illogical. If the former joins a party, he is disqualified while the latter is allowed to do the same.

5. Its vesting of decision-making authority in the presiding officer is criticised on two grounds. Firstly, he may not exercise this authority in an impartial and objective manner due to political exigencies. Secondly, he lacks the legal knowledge and experience to adjudicate upon the cases. In fact, two Speakers of the Lok Sabha (Rabi Ray-1991 and Shivraj Patil-1993) have themselves expressed doubts on their suitability to adjudicate upon the cases related to defections6 .