Daijiworld Media Network – New Delhi

New Delhi, Feb 26: The Union government has formally opposed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking a lifetime disqualification for convicted politicians, asserting that such legislative decisions fall exclusively within Parliament's jurisdiction.

In a detailed affidavit submitted to the apex court, the Centre contended that the plea's request effectively seeks to "rewrite the statute" or compel Parliament to legislate in a specific manner, actions that surpass the boundaries of judicial review. The affidavit emphasized, "The question whether a lifetime ban would be appropriate or not is a question that is solely within the domain of Parliament."

This legal stance arises amidst data from the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) indicating that 251 out of 543 elected Lok Sabha members in the 2024 elections have criminal cases against them, with 27 already convicted. This statistic represents the highest number of candidates with criminal charges elected to the Lower House to date.

The government further argued that existing provisions under Section 8(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which prescribe a disqualification period of six years from the date of conviction or release, are adequate. Extending this to a lifetime ban, the Centre posited, would disrupt the balance between deterrence and proportionality in punitive measures.

The affidavit also highlighted that while conviction serves as the basis for disqualification, the duration of such disqualification is a matter of legislative policy. It stated, "There is nothing inherently unconstitutional in limiting the effect of penalties by time."

This response was filed in connection with a petition by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, who sought not only a lifetime ban on convicted politicians but also the swift adjudication of criminal cases involving Members of Parliament and Legislative Assemblies.

The Centre's position underscores the principle of separation of powers, emphasizing that determinations regarding the qualifications and disqualifications of legislators are constitutionally entrusted to Parliament. As the affidavit concluded, "Parliament has the power both to determine the grounds for disqualification and the duration of disqualification."

The Supreme Court had previously sought responses from the Centre and the Election Commission on this matter, and further deliberations are anticipated to address the complex interplay between judicial review and legislative authority in the context of electoral reforms.