All Politicians are crooks. At least, that is what a lot of people think in a lot of countries. One assumes it is a reproach. But not in India. Indian politicians who have been charged with or convicted of serious misdeeds are three times as likely to win parliamentary elections as those who have not. Criminalization of politics has been a matter of great concern, particularly in the last two decades. Critically examine how both the Supreme Court and the Election Commission of India are becoming instrumental in cleaning politics.The 16th Lok sabha had the highest number of MPs with criminal cases against them. According to the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), which analyzed the election affidavits filed before the Election Commission, 34 per cent of the new MPs face criminal charges. The percentage in 2009 and 2004 stood at 30 and 24 respectively.
Among the major parties, the Rashtriya Janata Dal leads the table with all its four MPs facing criminal charges, followed by the Shiv Sena (15 of 18 MPs) and the Nationalist Congress Party (4 of 5 MPs). Over a third of the BJP’s new MPs are facing criminal charges and over a fifth face serious criminal charges. For the Congress, the proportion is lower at 18 per cent and 7 per cent respectively. Across parties, candidates facing criminal charges were more than twice as likely to win as compared to those with a clean record, the ADR data shows.
WHY SOME POLITICIANS HAVE CRIMINAL RECORDS?
Many politicians in India have criminal records because Indian political parties are more likely to select and field candidates with criminal record. Political parties especially if facing a higher degree of electoral uncertainty prefer such candidate. It is also believed criminal’s gangs are enjoying political patronage.
Political parties are more likely to choose candidates with criminal background in response to greater electoral competition and in constituencies with a higher illiteracy rate. The intuitive interpretation is that ‘alleged’ criminal candidates have a higher capacity to intimidate voters compared to non-criminals. The presence of these candidates depresses electoral turnouts. It is used more in areas with low literacy rates as intimidatory tactics are more likely to work on illiterate voters. Political parties are also more likely to field them when facing a strong incumbent who cannot be defeated by fair electoral competition.
SOME POLITICIANS HAVING CRIMINAL REORDS. Nitin Gadkari (Bribery, benami investments)
Gadkari has been accused of accepting bribes from corporations like Mahalaxmi Infraprojects and Dhirendra Anant Bhat as he was one of the parties in the irrigation scam. He has also been sent a show cause notice for inducing voters to take bribes.
Mayawati (Taj corridor, disproportionate assets)
The government of Uttar Pradesh sanctioned the repair of the Taj Heritage Corridor an important tourist area in Agra that is centered around the Taj Mahal. The project was fraught with problems including discrepancies in the release of funds. An income tax raid carried out also revealed disproportionate assets.
Amit Shah (Murder, Extortion, Kidnapping)
Amit Shah political career was damaged by his connection in the Sohrabuddin case – where a fake encounter was orchestrated by senior police officials at Amit Shah’s command.
Sheila Dixit (Corruption, Commonwealth Case)
The erstwhile CM of Delhi was investigated for allotting 3.5 corers of government funds from the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission for Rajiv Ratan Awas Yojana towards her political campaign. She was later accused of corruption regarding the 2010 common wealth games.
Suresh Kalmadi (Conspiracy, forgery, misconduct)
Kalmadi was serving as the chairman of the Commonwealth Games Organizing Committee when he was arrested in the Timing-Scoring-Result case. He was subsequently arrested for criminal conspiracy and cheating. During the investigation he made a claim of dementia dementia which was not proved.
Now recently The Supreme Court has finally asked the Union Government to get set up special courts to try criminal cases against politicians throughout the country. Given that a large number of our politicians do tend to have a criminal past, the apex court’s order seems aimed at remedying the situation. On an earlier occasion too it had voiced the idea. According to statistics, nearly a third of the present Members of Parliament have on-going criminal cases pending against them.
Even if in most cases the charges might pertain to political agitations, such as defying prohibitory orders, the fact is at least 21 per cent of the MPs are facing serious criminal charges.
Legal changes need to be made to modify laws and prevent criminals from contesting elections; Criminals should be blacklisted and disciplinary procedures should be meted out to them. Persons with jail term more than 7 years should not be given right to contest elections before HC ( High court) grants permission. Penalties should be inflicted on political parties who give tickets to criminals to contest elections. There should be fast track courts for criminals who are in politics as many criminals are allowed to contest elections if they are not convicted. Constitution should promote intra party democracy and accountability.
(The author writes regularly for “Kashmir Horizon”. Views are his own)
