दल-बदल का पैमाना अटल सरकार ने एक-तिहाई से दो-तिहाई किया, ममता फिर भी फंस गईं – mamata banerjee tmc anti defection law Atal Bihari ntcpsc
The bitterest truth of politics is that when power slips, the first people to leave it are themselves and Mamata Banerjee is currently facing this bitter truth in West Bengal. Amidst the shock of the election defeat, two prominent faces of Trinamool Congress (TMC), Kakoli Ghosh and Sudip Bandopadhyay, along with 20 MPs, have sounded the bugle of rebellion. This big split has created a stir in the Mamata camp.
Now the question is not just about the breakup of the party, but about its existence. Will these rebel MPs snatch away the name and election symbol of Mamata’s party? Amidst this entire political drama, will the country’s ‘Anti-Defection Law’ be able to sail Mamata’s boat or clear the way for the rebels?
What is the anti-defection law?
The story of defection in Haryana in which Ram came and Ram went is well known. Between 1967 and 1983, there was a lot of party change going on here. While socialist leaders broke ties with Congress, Congress took full advantage of this and formed its government in many states. In such a situation, the credit for bringing ‘Prohibition of Defection Law’ in the country goes to former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.
After the historic mandate of 1984, after the assassination of Indira Gandhi, when the Congress came to power with an overwhelming majority, the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi decided to root out the disease of ‘Aaya Ram, Gaya Ram’ i.e. horse-trading of MLAs and MPs in the country’s politics. For this purpose, in the year 1985, the Rajiv Gandhi government brought the ‘Anti-Defection Law’ and it was successfully passed by both the houses of the Parliament (Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha). This historic initiative was added as the 10th Schedule of the Constitution through the 52nd Constitutional Amendment, so that political stability and sanctity could be brought in the democratic system.
Atal government limits members to two-thirds
Under the law, if an MP or MLA leaves the party on his own will or violates his party’s ‘whip’ in the House, his membership can be cancelled. According to this, if one-third of the MLAs and MPs defect, then their membership can be saved.
The biggest weakness or anomaly in the anti-defection law was that individual defection was banned, but leaders were given legal recognition to do so in bulk. after this Atal Bihari Vajpayee Under the leadership of NDA in 2003, it was decided that if not only an individual but also a collective party is changed, it will also be declared unconstitutional.
By the 91st amendment to the Constitution, the number of members was increased from one-third to two-thirds. In this amendment, Section 3 was completely abolished, under which one-third of the party members could change the party. Through this, the Atal government had imposed a limit of two-thirds of members to stop and make the anti-defection law strict, now that too seems to be broken.
Mathematics in Mamta’s case
According to the Constitution, if two-thirds (2/3) of the MPs or MLAs of a party leave together, then the anti-defection law does not apply to them. TMC has 28 MPs in the Lok Sabha and 10 in the Rajya Sabha. Of the total number of 28 Lok Sabha MPs, there are 20 rebel MPs, who have easily touched the two-thirds mark. In such a situation, anti-defection law Mamata Banerjee Will tie the hands of. In this way, the membership of rebel TMC MPs will remain legal.
An interesting twist has emerged in political circles and recent legal debates. Despite rebelling against the party and forming a separate faction, these rebel MPs have technically and legally merged with NCPI, but will appeal to the Speaker in July for taking over the party and claiming the election symbol. Apart from this, more than 80 to 60 MLAs of Mamata Banerjee’s party in Bengal have formed separate factions and have also elected their leader in the House.
The Shinde and Ajit Pawar cases of Maharashtra have shown the country that despite the two-thirds limit, the anti-defection law is no longer a ‘panacea’ to save parties from disintegration. Under the anti-defection law, the final authority to take decisions rests with the Speaker of the House. Until the Speaker takes the final decision, the rebel MPs remain technically safe and this time gives them a chance to strengthen their position.
Also read: How did Bhupendra Yadav’s residence become the epicenter of rebellion in TMC?
Anti-defection law can only save the seats of MPs, but only the Election Commission decides who will get the party name and election symbol. The faction of Kakoli Ghosh and Sudip Bandopadhyay has the support of two-thirds of the parliaments. Sudip Bandyopadhyay has said that when two-thirds of the MPs part ways with them, they cannot stake claim on the parent party on the first day. That is why the path of merger with NCPI was chosen. Now the next fight will take place in July, when rebel TMC leaders will stake claim on the party and election symbol?
Will Mamata Banerjee lose her own party?
Technically and constitutionally it is absolutely possible for this to happen, but this path will not be so easy. As part of the overall strategy, the rebel MPs will first demand in front of the Speaker to declare themselves as the ‘real TMC’ on the basis of their ‘legislative majority’. After this this battle will reach the Election Commission. If the rebel group is successful in proving its numerical strength before the Commission, then Mamata Banerjee may have to lose the name and symbol of her own party.
If we look at history, it has always been seen that whenever two factions are formed in a party, both the factions call themselves the ‘real party’, in such a situation the decision is in the hands of the Election Commission. The Election Commission sees how many of the party’s elected public representatives (MPs and MLAs) are with which faction.
Usually, while resolving any party’s dispute, the Election Commission closely examines who has the upper hand among the party’s national executive, central officials and district presidents. If seen on the organizational front, Mamata Banerjee is in a very strong position at the moment because her hold on the cadre and organizational structure of TMC is still intact. However, the second and most important aspect of this matter is that in the recent disputes between Shiv Sena and NCP, the Election Commission had given more priority to the number of MPs and MLAs within the House than to the organization.
—- End —-
