Correcting the defect

In democracy, the principle of defection exists to protect the freedom of the individual party member. The 8220;conscientious objector8221;, or those with ideological differences with party leaders, have the right to seek parties better suited to their convictions. Indeed, it could be argued, that banning defections altogether as the cabinet has now decided to do is a highly authoritarian act. It could seriously hamper inner party democracy and can be regarded as an overdose of legalism. After all, in a situation where the Speakers themselves often play a highly partisan and discriminatory role, where high commands are often totally unaccountable over when and why they deploy the whip, and where there is often victimisation of members for not toeing the official line, the stern abolition of defection could become a draconian measure which curbs the individual freedom of the party member.

However, these arguments have to be weighed against the unprincipled antics of our desi aya rams and gaya rams. Since we are no longer in an era of overwhelming majorities but of coalition politics, every political party is obviously anxious to hold on to all its members. This maybe a reason why the cabinet has pushed this revision through at this time. In small states, with small majorities, defection by one or two members can lead to the toppling of state governments and shocking instability. Also, the 8220;conscientious objector8221; is a rarity among MPs and MLAs. Today8217;s legislators, as recently shown in Jharkhand, Goa and the Northeast, defect simply because of offers of ministerial berths or even hard cash. In times when 8216;8216;ideology8217;8217; seems to make little difference to legislators busily switching sides for personal gain, the new move to ban defections8212;once the bill is passed by Parliament8212;will certainly contribute towards curbing the crippling instability of Indian politics.