RP Act: Centre opposes plea in SC for life-time ban on convicted politicians
The Indian government has opposed a plea in the Supreme Court seeking a lifetime ban on convicted politicians from contesting elections. The Centre argued that imposing such a ban would be “unduly harsh” and that the decision on the duration of disqualification should be left to Parliament. The current law, under Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, disqualifies convicted individuals for six years after serving their sentence.
Centre’s Stance: The government maintains that a lifetime ban is excessive and that the six-year disqualification period is sufficient to act as a deterrent without imposing undue harshness.
Parliamentary Domain: The Centre emphasized that the decision on whether to impose a lifetime ban is solely within the domain of Parliament, as it involves legislative policy.
Constitutional Validity: The government argued that the existing provisions under the Representation of the People Act are constitutionally sound and do not suffer from excess delegation.
Petitioner’s Plea: Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay’s Public Interest Litigation (PIL) sought a lifetime ban on convicted politicians and expedited disposal of criminal cases against MPs and MLAs.
Legal Context:
Representation of the People Act, 1951: This Act governs the disqualification of parliamentarians and legislators. Section 8(1) specifies a six-year disqualification period for convicted individuals.
Judicial Review: The Centre noted that courts can declare laws unconstitutional but cannot direct Parliament to legislate in a particular manner.
The Centre’s opposition to a lifetime ban reflects its stance that such decisions should be made by Parliament, considering principles of proportionality and reasonability.
