Resign, switch, recontest: the loophole voters are paying for
The Madurantakam and Dharapuram byelections were caused by two MLAs who resigned and changed parties a month after being elected. The Tenth Schedule cannot stop this. Parliament should.
On October 6, voters in Madurantakam and Dharapuram will do something they did only five months ago: choose a member of the Assembly. They have to do it again not because anyone died or was disqualified, but because the two women they elected on the AIADMK's symbol in April resigned on May 25 and, the same day, joined the ruling Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam. Both are now on the ballot again, as TVK candidates.
The opposition calls this engineered defection. The ruling party says the two were driven out by their former leadership. This newspaper takes no view on their motives, and the charge that they were "bought over" has not been tested anywhere. Our concern is with the rule that made the manoeuvre possible, a rule that every major party in this State has used or welcomed at some point.
What the law does, and does not, do
The Tenth Schedule to the Constitution, added in 1985 and tightened in 2003, disqualifies a legislator who voluntarily gives up membership of the party on whose ticket they were elected. It was meant to stop the trading of legislators that brought down governments in the 1960s and 1970s.
But the Schedule only reaches people who remain members of the House. A legislator who resigns the seat first and then changes party cannot be disqualified, because there is nothing left to disqualify them from. The ruling party can then field the same person in the byelection, with the advantages that office brings. The voter who chose a party in April is asked to approve a different choice in October, and the public pays for an election that nobody asked for.
What should change
There are several ways to close the gap, and they have been discussed for years. A member who resigns a seat in order to change party could be barred from contesting a byelection for the rest of that House's term, or from holding ministerial or other paid political office during it. Parties could be required to disclose why a resignation was accepted and what was offered. The Election Commission could also be asked to report the cost of every byelection caused by a resignation, so that voters see the bill.
None of this would stop a legislator from leaving a party on principle. It would only mean that leaving carries a cost to the person who leaves, not just to the voters left behind.
A test for the voters, too
Until Parliament acts, the decision sits with the people of Madurantakam and Dharapuram, both Scheduled Caste reserved seats that have never held a byelection before. Whatever they decide on October 6, the question will outlast the count on October 9. A democracy in which a mandate can be quietly handed from one party to another a month after polling has a problem, whoever benefits this time.