Even as the clamour for a fresh anti-defection law is gaining ground, one wonders if the Narendra Modi government in its second term at the Centre might like to give it a shot.
For now, legislators appear impervious to this law enacted by the Rajiv Gandhi government at the Centre in 1985 with the menace of defections increasing alarmingly.
A case in point is the continuing drama in Karnataka which is the only southern state where the saffron brigade has held the reigns of power with B S Yeddyurappa as the chief minister, who is desperate and impatient for a second term.
On his part, BJP president Amit Shah, who is now the Union Home minister as well, has emphasised that the South is important for the BJP in further enlarging its footprint countrywide.
The ruling party at the Centre performed very creditably in the recent general elections having crossed the Rubicon of 300 in the 543-member Lok Sabha on its own for the first time.
At the same time, the BJP managed barely 30 seats out of the South's tally of 130 in the Lok Sabha, which was an improvement on the 21 seats they managed in the 2014 general elections.
What is animatedly being discussed is the need to analyse the reforms required in the prevailing anti-defection Law. The measure aimed at deterring "political defections" by law makers motivated by the lure of office and other considerations.
Clearly, the grounds for disqualification under the anti-defection Law or the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution pertains to an elected member voluntarily giving up his membership of a political party.
That is not happening in case a legislator votes or abstains contrary to any whip issued in the House by his political party or any one authorised to do so without prior permission.
The measure was aimed at curbing and checking the Aya Ram, Gaya Rams in the polity which began in the 1960s. The Law disallows MPs/MLAs to change parties after the elections to ensure the legislators followed the whip. This also applies to nominated members if he or she joins a party after six months as well as to an independent candidate.
Initially the law allowed defections if it involved one-third of the members, but it led to mass defections instead. Subsequently, the one-third rule was amended to two-third members of the party having to defect for it to be valid in the eyes of the Law.
Clearly the House is the authority to decide on defection cases. The Speaker sits in a Tribunal to decide cases of defection. It may be recalled the Supreme Court held that the anti-defection law does not violate any rights or freedoms or the basic structure of Parliamentary democracy. There is also the view that the anti-defection law adversely affects the independence of the MPs/MLAs.
It is also strongly believed that instead of making the Speaker the authority for disqualification, the decision should be made by the President on the advice of the Election Commission of India.
This would make the process similar to the disqualification procedure as provided in the Representation of the People Act. There can be additional penalties as well. The question is will the Modi government acquiesce to Parliament reconsidering the anti-defection act.
This assumes importance even as four of the six Telugu Desam Party MPs in the Rajya Sabha from Andhra Pradesh joined the BJP. They urged the Chairman of the House of Elders that they should be considered as a separate group.
This has deepened the crisis in former AP Chief Minister Nara Chandrababu Naidu's TDP, after it lost 22 out of the 25 Lok Sabha seats and 151/175 assembly seats to the Jaganmohan Reddy's YSRCP in Andhra Pradesh, where simultaneous elections in the state were held along with that of the Lok Sabha.
To refresh memories between 1967 and 1971 nearly 142 MPs and more than 1900 MLAs defected to other parties. It was during this period that Haryana's Aya Ram, Gaya Ram slogan gained traction with one of its legislators switching sides no less than three times in a day.
It is widely argued that the anti defection law calls for comprehensive revision. Political parties should limit issuance of whips in cases only when the government is in danger.
The Election Commission of India has recommended that any decision under the Tenth Schedule should be made by the President/Governor on its advice.
It is suggested there should be a Constitution Amendment vesting the power to decide matters of disqualification of an MP/MLA with the President/Governor, who in turn should act on the advice of the ECI. It is believed this will help preserve the integrity of the Speaker's office.
TR Ramachandran is a senior journalist and commentator.
