Decriminalise Politics

Supreme Court (SC) refuses Sanjay Dutt to fight election.

Will this decriminalise politics?

Sanjay Dutt was convicted under the Arms Act and sentenced to six-year imprisonment by a TADA court. the actor is on bail over a weapons conviction,.he had been campaigning to represent the city of Lucknow in Uttar Pradesh state on behalf of the socialist Samajwadi Party.
The court rejected Dutt's plea, saying it would set the wrong precedent to allow him to run in the April 16 - May 13 elections.He was found guilty in 2007 of possessing illegal weapons that he bought from men accused of plotting the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts in which more than 250 people died.
Uttar Pradesh is regarded as crucial in the elections as it is India's most populous state and sends 80 MPs to the 545-member national parliament.
The desision has once again sent a great message during the time of election where criminalisation has become a worrisome characteristic of India's politics and electoral system.

To combat criminalisation, we need the strengthening of existing laws by removing certain lacunae.

Section 8 of the RPA, for instance, disqualifies a person from contesting elections if he or she has been convicted in the manner specified in sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) of the Act.

• Under Sections 8(2) and (3), a convicted person is disqualified for the period of imprisonment and six years thereafter.
• Under Section 8(1), the disqualification is only for a period of six years from the date of conviction, whatever the term of imprisonment.
• Section 8(4) exempts sitting members of Parliament and the State legislatures from disqualification following conviction under any of the preceding three sub-sections if they have filed an appeal against their conviction within three months of the judgment.

The exemption will be in force until the court disposes of the appeal.
And most often criminals do win, which is why they are increasingly present in the country’s representative institutions. The consequences of the trend, if allowed to continue unchecked, hardly deserve an elaboration and are seen in the increasing criminalisation of the process of governance with ministers, legislators, bureaucrats and unscrupulous businessmen combining to plunder public funds and prey on the public.

In fact a new dimension has been added to the process by the Criminalisation of bureaucracy and the police. What makes the situation particularly dangerous is that a criminalized administration poses a serious threat to the country’s security. What we say in the past was a result of all this nonsense.

De-Criminalisation of politics should be the main issue in all elections in the country. While political parties have a serious responsibility not to put up criminals as candidates, voters have an equally strong responsibility of defeating candidates with a criminal record.
The election is at our doorway and the time is now to choose what kind of governance we want for us. One-way is to let things happen the way it is and mourn. There is a second way and that is by ensuring that we do our best to make sure that criminals are voted out.
We have also to see that we do not vote on the basis of caste religion but on the personal merit of the candidate. We have been voting on the basis of cate creed etc. for quite a long time and it has bred only misrule. It is hightime that we set right our blunders if not for us then at least for the sake of our children. Narrow gains are not going to get us anywhere. Even the leaders of various parties will have to realise that criminals will one day snatch power from them.

Ruling with the help of ciminals and goondas can not last and examples are not needed to prove it. The sooner it is understood the better it will be but for the general citizens of India we must do our part. We want strong government NOT KHICHRI GOVERNMENT.

INVENT INDIA

Who are the democrats and secular lighthouses of freedom of expression and liberty?

The disease “Criminalisation” is all over ..its just not about few parties and states Criminalisation of politics in India has attained a stage, where it needs serious attention from the citizen, political parties as there was a steady decline in values of all sections of our society

It is the sensibilities and commonsense of the voter that can change this.we all know that we have to make choice between aThug and a thief in situations . This increasing Criminalisation of the political and social fabric is the main danger, not the mixing of religion with politics I feel.

It is astonishing that persons having criminal background and a number of cases registered against them have made easy access to politics and are occupying high position in the state administration upon getting elected by using muscle and money power

Friends you will be surprised to know that of the 543 men and women that were elected to the Lok Sabha in May 2004 125 had criminal charges against them. The 125 MPs were from 17 different states and two Union territories. A large chunk faced serious charges including murder, rape, dacoity, kidnapping and corruption.

There is a great tendency with the elected leaders at some point or the other to brush with the law .It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that corruption is the reason for the malice.

Of the 125.. 96 faced charges with potential sentences of two years or more. Under the Representation of the People Act, a person sentenced for two years or more is disqualified from contesting elections. We should not forget that the number have been large as were either vague or illegible.

27 of those elected in May 2004 faced charges under IPC for life sentence/imprisonment.

14 faced charges of 10-year sentences.

16 were with maximum 7-year.. Potential sentences if convicted.

In other words, at least 57 had really serious charges against them

Of the 96 BJP headed the list with 23 followed by the Congress with 17. It is true that the RJD’s 7, the SP’s 9 and the BSP’s 5 constitute a much larger proportion of those parties’ MPs

No proze for guessing that UP and Bihar toped the charts. The only states which had none of their MPs figuring in the list were the eight north-eastern states and the three northern states of Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and Uttaranchal. Barring Assam, which has 14 Lok Sabha seats, what is noticeable is that these are among the smallest states.Out that many of 125 winners who faced criminal charges were not becoming MPs for the first time. Several among them had already served more than one term in Parliament.

I have mentioned these figures to clear the doubts and state that Criminalisation of politics is spread across the length and breadth of our country. The movement is getting more and more established.

Please do not forget in India, it is not politics which needs saving from religion but religion which needs to be protected from political hoodlums. Temples, gurudwaras and waqf boards provide criminals with vast amounts of economic resources and a ready made political base. They have converted these religious institutions into battlegrounds for gang warfare.

Even this politicisation of religion would be a relatively harmless affair, if the parties concerned vowed not to use criminal means to secure their political ends. If we read history we will realize that the foundation of Pakistan was laid through bloodshed and criminal acts of politicians rather than by religion dominating politics.

State funding is the perfect pill to cleanse the electoral syastem

There should be legislation according to which election funding should be legalized and State funding is the perfect pill to cleanse the country's electoral system

Elections and money go hand in hand. It is a well-established fact that during elections, candidates and parties are largely supported by money that is not accounted for. Instances of arm twisting by parties or candidates are not uncommon. Till date there is no institutional mechanism for funding as opinion on the issue of state funding of elections continues to be divided. The reason being off course is little acceptance or consensus in the political parties over this issue.

Till the time there is no political will to limit money power and to ensure a level playing field – (the ballot box) nothing will change. Who can muster the political will and put these proposals into practice is a moot question

IN 1998 under the chairmanship of Indrajit Gupta of the Communist Party of India (CPI) state funding was proposed but nothing came out of it. Again in 2006 with a view to give a dimension to the issue of state funding an agreement among recognized political parties was proposed to the Election Commission to consider certain recommendations and decision is still awaited. Some felt at the same time that 'not enough' while some others 'totally opposed' the modality.

The scope and mode of state funding of elections is indeed a factor to keep a check on model code of conduct and it should have a legal sanctity.

No doubts transparency seems to be the buzz word for most of the corporate houses as far as political donations or funding is concerned lets understand the views of corporate conglomerates like the Tatas and the Birlas. They have set up electoral trusts to fund political parties and independent candidates. Most of the corporates and industrialists are in favour of state funding. CII has a policy on political funding. Mahindra and Bajaj in principle advocate state.

Political parties have performed a vital public function to sustain democracy at the same time there is a great and urgent need to strengthen the democratic forces with a clean electoral process. We need to create an environment where donations can be made to political parties in a transparent, non-discriminatory and non-discretionary manner to help achieve a political framework for overall economic and social development of the country.

Mixture of individual contributions, supporters in the diaspora and members of the business community, some of whom do not want to be disclosed are sure against it along with parties who claim and express doubt that the government would agree to provide funds to its electoral rivals.

The pro state funding advocates will have to justify why it would not be a big mistake for any opposition party to have financial expectations on the government. How do you expect an enemy to give you ammunition to fight it?

An initiative is needed…INVENT INDIA. Since last 25 years this issue has not been converted into a law Inspite of the fact that state funding of elections would bring in an element of equality to electoral contests, particularly because it would help remove the disadvantage faced by parties which represent the socially and economically weaker sections and which often have limited access to big donors.

The state should provide funds to political parties. State funding are ideal and it will streamline the political process. It will 100 % clean the electoral system will bring transparency and accountability. But then those issues don’t figure on the electoral agenda of any political party.