Tenth Schedule (Anti Defection Law)

Why in News?

Defection is not just a matter of changing a party. It involves questions of political morality, judicial review, constitutional governance, legislative autonomy, and deliberative democracy.

What is the rationale behind the anti-defection law?

• Meaning – Constitutional expert Subhash C. Kashyap described defection as “abandonment of loyalty, duty or principle, or of one’s leader or cause”.
• In political terms, it refers to legislators switching political parties for personal gain, undermining collective responsibility.
• Anti-Defection Law – It was enacted in 1985 during the Prime Ministership of  Rajiv Gandhi through the 52nd Constitutional Amendment Act, which inserted the 10^th Schedule into the Constitution.
• Objective
  • To establish constitutional mechanisms to discourage unprincipled practices/defections,
  • Protect the stability of government, and
  • Preserve the integrity of the electoral mandate.

What about the prelude to the enactment of the law?

• Era of Instability – The period between 1967 and 1971 is usually referred to as the “Era of Instability”.
• Decline of one-party dominance – After the 1967 general elections, defection became a strategic tool to capture or topple governments.
• Between 1967–71, 45 governments were formed and collapsed across various states because of frequent defections by legislators.
• Legislators often switched sides not for ideology but for ministerial posts or material benefits.
• Popular phrase – “Aya Ram, Gaya Ram” got popularized in Indian politics to describe turncoats and defections — coined after Haryana MLA who switched parties thrice in one day (1967).
• Y B Chavan Committee on Defections (1969) – It was the first systematic study of defections; it documented the extent of the problem and recommended several measures to address it.
• Definition – Defection as voluntary giving up of allegiance to a political party on whose symbol a legislator had been elected, except when such action resulted from a decision of the party.

India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Guyana, Sierra Leone, Zimbabwe – MPs can be disqualified for defying party whip. 

UK, US, Canada – Do not have an anti-defection law, legislators retain seats even if they defy party directions; parties may discipline internally.

What constitutes defection under the Tenth Schedule?

• Applicability – The Anti-Defection law applies to both members of Parliament and state legislatures.

Grounds for Disqualification

• If a member of a House voluntarily gives up membership of their political party.
• If a member votes or abstains from voting in a house, contrary to the directions of their political party, without prior permission, and such voting or abstention has not been condoned by the party within 15 days.
• If an independent member joins a political party after elections.
• If a nominated member joins a political party after six months of taking their seat.

What is the exception to disqualification?

• Main Exception – The principal exception to disqualification under the Tenth Schedule is merger of parties.
• Merger of Parties – A legislator is protected from disqualification if at least two-thirds of legislators of a party agree to merge with another political party.
• Split Exception (Removed) – Originally, the Tenth schedule allowed one‑third of members to split from their party without attracting disqualification.
• But this provision was abused, leading to mass defections under the guise of internal factionalism.
• 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 – Addressed this issue by removing the split exception entirely and retaining only the exception for mergers.
• Safeguards Against Rewards – The 91st Amendment also inserted Articles 75(1B), 164(1B), and 361B to prevent defectors from being rewarded with ministerial offices and remunerative political posts until re-elected.
• Role of Presiding Officers – The effectiveness of the Anti‑Defection Law depends on Presiding Officers (Speaker/Chairman).

What is the role of the Speaker with respect to the 10^th Schedule?

• Para 6 (1) of the Tenth Schedule – Vests the power to decide disqualification petitions in the office of the Presiding Officer of the House, and their decision shall be final.
• Sole Authority – Only the Speaker (or Chairman in the Rajya Sabha) can decide whether a legislator has defected and must be disqualified; no other body has original jurisdiction.
• Neutrality Concerns in Practice – Speakers are typically elected members of the ruling party.
• Allegations of political bias, particularly in deciding petitions against their own party's rivals have repeatedly raised questions about institutional independence.
• Timing as a political tool – Speakers have been accused of deliberately delaying decisions on disqualification petitions keeping legislators in midpoint and allowing governments to survive floor tests.

Judicial review of Speaker’s decision

• Kihoto Hollohan vs Zachillhu (1992) – The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the Anti-Defection Law while saying that the Speaker’s decisions are subject to judicial review.
• The court held that the Speaker acts as a Tribunal under the Tenth Schedule, and judicial review remains part of the basic structure of the Constitution, which cannot be by-passed.
• Ravi S Naik vs Union of India (1994) – The SC ruled that voluntarily giving up membership does not necessarily require a formal resignation by a legislator to be disqualified under the Anti-Defection Law.
• Nabam Rebia vs Deputy Speaker (2016) – The Supreme Court held that a Speaker should not decide on disqualification petitions while a notice seeking his/her removal is pending.
• Keisham Meghachandra Singh vs Speaker, Manipur (2020) – The Court recommended that Speakers ordinarily decide disqualification petitions within three months.

What are the impact of anti-defection law in India?

• Government Stability – Reduced frequent collapses seen in the “Aya Ram, Gaya Ram” era (1967–71).
• Party Discipline – Legislators are compelled to follow the party whip, preventing opportunistic defections.
• Curbing Corruption – Intended to check defections motivated by ministerial posts or monetary gains.
• Integrity of Mandate – Reinforces the idea that voters elect parties, not just individuals.

• Weakening Accountability – Legislators justify votes by citing the whip, breaking the link with constituents.
• Executive Dominance – By prohibiting dissent, the law strengthens the ruling party’s control over Parliament.
• Failure to Prevent Defections – Despite the law, defections continue (e.g., Arunachal Pradesh 2015, Uttarakhand 2016).

What are the ethical dimensions on the Anti‑Defection Law in India?

• Integrity & Loyalty – Loyalty to the party and voters’ mandate.
• This law prevents legislators from betraying the trust of those who elected them.
• Example – A legislator elected on a party symbol cannot ethically switch sides for personal gain — it violates integrity and loyalty to mandate.
• Stability vs Conscience – Should stability of government outweigh freedom of conscience?; the law enforces party discipline but restricts individual moral judgment.
• Example – An MP opposing a flawed policy may still be forced to vote with the party whip, raising questions of ethical autonomy vs collective responsibility.
• Preventing Corruption & Opportunism – It stops legislators from defecting for ministerial posts or monetary benefits, which promotes righteousness in public life and discourages opportunism.
• Example – Mass defections in the 1960s–70s (“Aya Ram, Gaya Ram”) showed how unchecked opportunism eroded public trust.

What lies ahead?

• Limit the Scope of the Law – It restrict disqualification to critical votes like confidence motions & money bills, which keeps governments stable while allowing free debate on other issues.
• Neutral Authority for Decisions – Move the adjudication from the Speaker/Chairman (often politically aligned) to a neutral body like the Election Commission to ensures fairness and reduces bias.
• Preventing Rewards for Defectors – Strengthen provisions that bar defectors from holding ministerial posts/political offices & prevents defections driven by personal gain.
• Ensuring Timely Decisions – Mandate a fixed timeline (e.g., 3 months) for deciding disqualification petitions; builds public trust and prevents manipulation through delays.

References

1. Indian Express | How the Tenth Schedule regulates political defections
2. PRS | Anti-Defection Law - Intent and Impact