Governance, TLP-UPSC Mains Answer Writing
Q. 4. The Representation of the People Act, 1951 has served India’s democracy for over seven decades, but growing political and legal complexities demand its reform. Critically examine the major challenges associated with the Act and suggest a roadmap for its overhaul.” (250 words, 15 marks)
Introduction
The Representation of the People Act, 1951 provides the statutory foundation for free and fair elections in India. Yet, evolving political practices and legal loopholes necessitate reforms to sustain the credibility of India’s electoral democracy.
Body
Key Provisions of the RPA, 1951
- Disqualification on Conviction: Bars candidates convicted under offences like corruption, terrorism, and rape from contesting elections under Section 8.
- Mandatory Disclosure: Requires candidates to file affidavits detailing criminal antecedents, assets, liabilities, and educational qualifications under Section 33A.
- Spending Limits: Imposes ceilings on electoral expenditure to ensure fairness, as mandated under Section 77.
- Definition of Corrupt Practices: Outlines specific offences such as bribery and communal appeals as corrupt electoral practices under Section 123.
- Party Registration: Enables the Election Commission to register and monitor political parties as provided under Section 29A.
Key Challenges and Gaps in the RPA, 1951
- Criminalisation of Politics: Candidates with serious charges can still contest elections. Example: 43% of 2019 Lok Sabha MPs declared criminal cases (ADR).
- Weak Disclosure Enforcement: No strict penalty for false or misleading affidavits.
- Expenditure Loopholes: Actual campaign costs often exceed declared limits. Example: Lavish roadshows and digital ads are run without accounting under Section 77.
- Limited EC Powers: ECI cannot deregister parties violating norms. Example: Repeated MCC violations saw only warnings issued, not de-registration.
- Identity-Based Appeals: Caste and religion still drive electoral campaigns. Example: Caste-based rhetoric was visible in 2022 UP state elections.
- MCC Not Legally Binding: Violations carry no statutory consequence. Example: Pre-poll promises like freebies continue despite EC censure.
- Opaque Political Funding: Lack of transparency in donations undermines accountability. Example: Electoral Bonds enabled anonymous high-value donations to parties.
Impacts of These Challenges
- Voter Distrust: Credibility of electoral process is weakened.
- Unlevel Playing Field: Honest candidates face unfair disadvantages.
- Judicial Overload: Courts struggle with pending election-related cases.
- Democratic Dilution: Faith in electoral democracy suffers systemic damage.
Suggested Reforms
- Pre-Conviction Disqualification: Bar candidates with serious charges at the framing of charge stage, as also recommended by the Law Commission.
- Legal Status to MCC: Codify Model Code to enable enforceability, as proposed by the Goswami Committee.
- Strengthen ECI Autonomy: Empower the EC with more regulatory authority, in line with NCRWC suggestions.
- Time-Bound Adjudication: Establish fast-track courts for swift disposal of electoral offences.
- Transparent Funding Mechanism: Mandate real-time disclosure of political donations to curb opacity.
Relevant Supreme Court Judgments
- Association for Democratic Reforms (2023): Held electoral bonds unconstitutional for violating citizens’ right to information on political funding.
- Public Interest Foundation (2018): Urged Parliament to curb criminalisation of politics through stricter candidate disqualification norms.
Conclusion
Despite limitations, the RPA anchors India’s democratic process. Reforming it in tune with judicial insights and institutional recommendations will ensure cleaner elections and strengthen trust in electoral democracy.
