By Pradeep Padgaonkar
The common meaning of the word defection is desertion, rebellion, and abandonment but nowadays this word is commonly associated with politics and goes hand in hand.
In 1967, an MLA from Haryana, Gaya (remained honest to his name) Lal changed his party thrice on the same day.”Aaya Ram Gaya Ram” became a popular phrase in Indian Politics after this. It became a common practice to switch political parties in various States which brought down state governments from their power. And, hence it was felt necessary to curb such unethical moves.
That is when the idea of having an anti-discrimination law floated.
After the assassination of former Prime Minister, the late Indira Gandhi, there was a sympathy wave throughout the country. Congress party, led by Rajiv Gandhi, won 404 Lok Sabha seats in the 1984 Lok Sabha Elections. It was the first time a political party received an absolute mandate. To clean the mess, a law was enacted in 1985 to prevent the legislators from changing their political affiliations during their tenure in office.
The anti-defection law was introduced in 1985 through the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution and is popularly known as Anti Anti-Defection Act. It applies to both the Parliament and the state assemblies. In 2003, through the 91st Amendment, the anti-defection law was made more effective to deal with regular defection. It aimed to maintain stability in the party system and promote party discipline.
However, the smart politicians take advantage of the flaws in the law. It enables a party to merge with another party if at least two-thirds of the legislators of the party are in favour of such a merger. Neither the members who decide to merge nor the ones who stay in the original party will face any disqualification.
A few months ago, six Congress MLAs were disqualified after they cross-voted in the recent Rajya Sabha polls in Himachal Pradesh.
Andhra Pradesh assembly speaker very recently issued orders disqualifying eight MLAs under the anti-defection law for allegedly “shifting their loyalties to other parties”.
Goa has a funny history. After attaining statehood in 1987, Pratapsingh Rane who was elected as the Chief Minister prior to statehood, continued to be the CM till the end of his term in March 1990. And then began the ‘Musical Chair Rule’. Between 1990-1994, Goa witnessed as many as 6 Chief Ministers taking the oath.
Churchill Alemao became the CM for 18 days, Luis Proto Barbosa took over from him for 8 months, Ravi Naik for 2 years 4 months, Dr Wilfred De Souza for 11 months, Ravi Naik again for 6 days (are you laughing?) and Dr Wilfred De Souza again for 8 months. It looked like the political ambitions of leaders were satisfied and there was a stable (?) Government from Dec 1994 to July 1998, Pratapsingh Rane being the CM.
But the happiness of Goans was short-lived. Referred to as ‘Pitamaha Bhishma’ by political analysts, Dr Wilfred De Souza took over as CM for 4 months in 1998. Louzinho Faleiro became CM for the first time in 2 and ½ months.
As a result of toppling Governments within a short span of time, the President’s Rule was imposed for 4 months. Later Louzinho Faleiro became CM for 5 months and Francisco Sardinha took over for 11 months before Manohar Parrikar could stabilise further damage from 2000 to 2005.
Politically, Goa has a long history of defections. Goa Assembly Speaker Ramesh Tawadkar, last week, dismissed the disqualification petition filed against MLAs Michael Lobo and Digambar Kamat who shifted allegiance from Congress to BJP.
The petition was filed by Goa Pradesh Congress Committee President Amit Patkar. Now, Amit Patkar has urged State Legislative Assembly Speaker Ramesh Tawadkar to decide on the pending disqualification petitions against eight MLAs who defected from Congress to BJP in September 2022 soon after the elections. Digambar Kamat, Michael Lobo, Aleixo Sequeira, Rodolfo Fernandes, Rajesh Faldessai, Kedar Naik, Sankalp Amonkar and Delilah Lobo left the party.
To decide or not to decide, is the big question! Will the Speaker dare to disqualify the defectors? Supreme Court has ruled that the Speaker who cannot stay away from the pressures and wishes of his political party does not deserve to occupy his chair. Will the Party Pressure prevail? Or is it going to be a landmark decision? Only time will tell. Till then, keep guessing!
