Front Page   

All-party meet to discuss verdict

By Our Special Correspondent

New Delhi MARCH 13. The Government intends to convene an all-party meet to take cognisance of the situation arising out of the Supreme Court judgment quashing the amendment of the Representation of the People Act.

"The legislation was the result of a consensus arrived at an all-party meeting, we need another exercise of the kind to react to the situation," said the Parliamentary Affairs Minister, Sushma Swaraj.

The Supreme Court judgment evoked a mixed response from political parties — the BJP and the Samajwadi Party were unhappy, the CPI (M) felt there was no need for it while the Congress welcomed it.

The Congress said the judgment had vindicated its stand on the issue. "Our stand has been vindicated, the judgment of the Supreme Court should be respected," said the party spokesperson, Jaipal Reddy.

The party said it would not cooperate with any move to nullify the judgment. It, however, expressed itself against vesting of the power of disqualification with the Returning Officers.

"We believe that people have an inalienable right to know about the antecedents, assets and liabilities of their representatives," Mr. Reddy said.

The amendments moved by the party on the issue were defeated in Parliament, and its views articulated in Sonia Gandhi's letter, were also rejected.

The BJP differed. Its spokesperson, V.K. Malhotra, said that all parties needed to consider whether the court was right in quashing the due process of law in Parliament.

He urged the parties to consider whether Parliament should have the right to legislate on such matters or not.

However, both the major political parties feel that there was a risk in giving the Returning Officers the right to disqualify candidates. "There is a risk of this power being misused in favour of the ruling party," said Mr. Malhotra.

The Samajwadi party also disagreed with the judgment. Articulating his party's view, Akhilesh Singh said the statement on assets and wealth was pointless till corruption was eradicated. He also found fault with the provision dealing with those who have cases pending against them and said often politicians who led mass struggles had cases slapped against them. "It would be unfair to disqualify such people," he said.

The party pointed out that if such a provision was allowed to exist then certain Ministers in the current Government would also have to quit their jobs as "the CRPC and IPC make no distinction between criminal and political cases."

The CPI (M) politburo member, Prakash Karat, said the amendment carried out by Parliament was fine and he felt that there was no need for the court to strike it down.

The amendment served the purpose in that the elected representatives made declarations to the Speaker, including their assets. Declaration of assets by all contestants and their dependents would only add to bureaucratic work.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Front Page

News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |

Stories in this Section

• Declaration of assets, antecedents must: SC
• All-party meet to discuss verdict
• 12 killed in Mumbai train blast
• Iraq rejects British draft
• Review committee to check misuse of POTA
• Bonds offer
• Pak. arrests 36 fishermen
• 2 killed in Rajouri blast
• Marandi Govt. loses majority

Copyright © 2003, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu