Strict view on defection from political parties necessary to sustain faith of citizens in democracy: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently observed that a strict view must be taken of defection of elected representatives from political parties in order to sustain the faith of the citizens in the democratic setup of conducting elections, and their confidence in the candidates elected by the electorate [Sheeba George v The State Election Commission of Kerala & Ors.]..A division bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly observed that the law relating to the defection of elected persons in the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1999 and the Kerala Local Authorities (Disqualification of Defected Members) Rules, 2000, was made with the intention of upholding the constitutional principles and the democratic setup in the State.“In our considered opinion, insofar as the law relating to defection in regard to the elected members of the local body is concerned, it is made with the intention of upholding the constitutional principles, the democratic setup, and the rule of law prevailing in the country. This we say because, in order to sustain the faith of the citizens in the democratic setup of conducting elections, and for retaining and sustaining the confidence of the citizens in the candidates elected by the electorate, a strict view is to be adopted in the matter of defection,” the Court said in its order..The Court further observed that the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution supports the view that such laws needed strengthening so as to curb "the evil of defection"“.. the Tenth Schedule was brought in to cure the evil of defection recognizing the significant impact it has on the health of our democracy, and that the 91st Constitutional Amendment also strengthens the aforesaid view that the law needed further strengthening in order to curb the evil of defection. In our view, the said proposition would equally, or with more force apply to the laws relating to the defection in the local bodies,” the order stated..The Court was considering an appeal against the order of a single-judge that disqualified the appellant, Sheeba George, an elected member of Keemrampara Grama Panchayat in the Local Self Government institution elections held in December 2020.The appellant had stood as an independent candidate in the election and had defeated the candidates belonging to the Left Democratic Front and the United Democratic Front. In the nomination paper submitted by the appellant, a specific declaration had been made made to the effect that she did not belong to any political party or any coalition and did not receive any help from any of the political parties or coalitions.The appellant had also published an election notice and posters requesting the electors to vote in her favor as an independent candidate. .After the election, the respondent, one Mamachan Joseph, complained to the State Election Commissioner that the appellant had sworn a declaration in accordance with Rule 3(2)(c) of the Kerala Local Authorities (Disqualification of Defected Members) Rules, 2000 affirming that she is the official candidate of CPI (M) (LDF), in spite of already making a declaration under Section 3(1)(c) of the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1999 that she won the election as a candidate without any support of any political party or coalition..Subsequently, the State Election Commissioner passed an order disqualifying the appellant under section 3(1)(a) of the 1999 Act due to defection as it was found that the plea of mistake or error in the declaration could not be a valid and reasonable defense, particularly since no effort was made to rectify the error at the appropriate time.A single-judge of the High Court upheld the order of the State Election Commissioner. .The division bench relied on the Tenth Schedule which provides for disqualification on the ground of defection and explained that since there was no proof to establish that the independent member had joined a political party, the declaration furnished by her could itself be a relevant piece of evidence..The Court found that the appellant had violated the provisions of the 1999 Act and the 2000 Rules and, therefore, upheld the order of the single-judge. “In that view of the matter, when a declaration was made by the appellant, an independent candidate who won the election without support of a coalition or of a political party, as if to appear that she has contested as an independent member with the support of a political party/coalition, and the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat registered so in the statutory register; it is clear that the petitioner has violated the requirements of law; which is a clear proof to show that the appellant has joined the CPI(M)/LDF coalition in terms of the provisions of the Act and the Rules, and contested and won the election to the post of Vice President as a candidate fielded by the said political party/ coalition,” the order stated..The petitioner was represented by Senior Advocate K Ramakumar and advocates T Ramprasad Unni, SM Prasanth, RS Aswini Sankar and TH Aravind.The respondents are represented by advocates Deepu Lal Mohan, T K Ajithkumar, Alexander Joseph, C Dilip and R Pradeep..[Read Judgment]