House that?

Jaya Bachchan's unhappiness at being singled out for disqualification as a member of Rajya Sabha is understandable. The Parliament Preventi...

Jaya Bachchan8217;s unhappiness at being singled out for disqualification as a member of Rajya Sabha is understandable. The Parliament Prevention of Disqualification Act is so exact in its allowances for MPs holding offices of profit under the government that the axe now falling upon her could clear away so very many of her parliamentary colleagues. As chairperson of the Uttar Pradesh Film Development Board, Bachchan would appear to be a fit case for eviction from the red carpets of the Upper House. The manner in which recommendations to this effect have been hastened to Rashtrapati Bhavan, however, threatens to engulf the Election Commission in charges of politicisation and manipulation.

Before the bitterness of those charges corrodes the bipartisan character of the EC, the political class needs to rise above the lure of vendetta and address the need for electoral reform.

Separation of power is a critical prerequisite for the legislature to keep check on the executive. Restraints on legislators holding offices of profit under the government is a vital means of ensuring that separation. Therefore, exceptions to that disqualification are meticulously noted in provisions of Prevention of Disqualification Act. The air is suddenly rife with allegations of various political parties benefiting their legislators with responsibilities that could amount to offices of profit. Unless it is the collective wisdom of Parliament that its membership be mired in endless plaints before the EC and the courts, a relook at the law is due.

Parliament is in most cases best qualified to regulate its own. It is a task it has taken up quite a few times in recent years. From amending the domicile clause for the Rajya Sabha and strengthening the definition of defection to limiting the number of legislators who can be accommodated in ministries, Parliament has been responsive to the changed demands of the time. Now, with the question of office of profit comes a connected issue. It is not just that conferring an office of profit on an MP could amount to patronage. Parliament must also inquire into the altered character of the Upper House, where nominations are often seen as simple acts of patronage.