Skip to main content

RTI interventions question freedom of MPs to act against their party’s diktat

By Venkatesh Nayak*
According to a recent news report published by a prominent national daily, some newly elected MLAs in West Bengal were being required by their leaders to sign an oath of allegiance to their political party. Whether this measure has been authorised by the party’s apex leadership or is more of a localised show of fealty to the leadership remains to be proved. However, two RTI interventions made recently, with the Secretariats of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha shows that MPs never cast their vote in Parliament against the “whip” or the diktat of their respective political parties since May 2009 (until March 2016). The four RTI applications and responses received are attached.

Freedom of action in Parliament

Article 105(2) of the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and action for every MP on the floor of the Houses of Parliament. No MP can be sued in a court of law for anything said or done on the floor of the House when Parliament is in session. This provision reads as follows:
“(2) No member of Parliament shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in Parliament or any committee thereof, and no person shall be so liable in respect of the publication by or under the authority of either House of Parliament of any report, paper, votes or proceedings.”
However, the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution, popularly known as the anti-defection law, introduced by the 52nd constitutional amendment in 1985, makes voting or abstaining from voting, contrary to the directions issued by one’s political party, a ground for disqualifying an MP from the membership of the House. This disqualification is however subject to an exception. If the MP has voted or abstained from voting against the party “whip” by obtaining prior permission from the competent authority and such authority has condoned such action or abstention, he or she will not attract disqualification. Other grounds for disqualification of an MP include defecting from the parent political party without resigning one’s seat in the House.
In all such matters the decision as to whether the MP attracts disqualification from the membership of the House will be made by the Speaker in the case of the Lok Sabha (Lower House) or the Chairperson in the case of the Rajya Sabha (Upper House). Both Houses have notified Rules for implementing this anti-defection law. Although the legal provisions state that the decision of the presiding officer will be final, such decisions are subject to judicial review on grounds of mala fide intent, amongst others.
Rule 3(6) of The Members of Lok Sabha (Disqualification on Grounds of Defection) Rules, 1985 provides for the procedure for enforcing the provision for MPs to cast a vote against their party’s whip. This Rule reads as follows:
“(6) Where a member belonging to any political party votes or abstains from voting in the House contrary to any direction issued by such political party or by any person or authority authorised by it in this behalf, without obtaining, in either case, the prior permission of such political party, person or authority, the leader of the legislature party concerned or where such member is the leader, or as the case may be, the sole member of such legislature party, such member, shall, as soon as may be after the expiry of fifteen days from the date of such voting or abstention, and in any case within thirty days from the date of such voting or abstention, inform the Speaker as in Form II whethersuch voting or abstention has or has not been condoned by such political party, person or authority.
“Explanation.—A member may be regarded as having abstained from voting only when such member, being entitled to vote, voluntarily refrained from voting.”
Similarly Rule 3(5) of The Members of Rajya Sabha (Disqualification on Grounds of Defection) Rules, 1985 which applies to the MPs of the Rajya Sabha reads as follows:
“5) Where a member belonging to any political party votes or abstains from voting in the Council contrary to any direction issued by such political party or by any person or authority authorised by it in this behalf, without obtaining, in either case, the prior permission of such political party, person or authority, the leader of the legislature party concerned or where such member is the leader, or as the case may be, the sole member of such legislature party, such member, shall, as soon as may be thereafter and in any case within thirty days from the date of such voting or abstention, inform the Chairman as in Form-II whether such voting or abstention has or has not been condoned by such political party, person or authority.
“Explanation.—A member may be regarded as having abstained from voting only when he, being entitled to vote, voluntarily refrained from voting.”
So the Constitution clearly recognises the right of an MP to vote against the party diktat and the Rules made by the two Houses provide the procedure for the exercise of this right. Have MPs exercised their right to vote against the party whip in the recent past is a pertinent question that any voter may ask.

No MP has crossed the party diktat since May 2009

The Secretariats (Sectts.) of the Houses of Parliament have confirmed in their reply to my RTIs that they have not received any intimation from any major political party, about condoning the action of their MPs voting or abstaining from voting against the party diktat during the last 7 years. I did not ask similar information for earlier periods as the Sectts. might have treated my request as being vexatious holding that I had asked for records that are more than 10 years old and they would have had to search for them long and hard.
The RTI replies imply that MPs are willing to toe the party line always, rather than talk to the citizens whom they represent and then vote according to their considered advice even if it is against the party’s diktat. Neither have these MPs voted or abstained from voting according to their conscience and against the party diktat. In many conferences, MPs lament the “restriction” on their freedom imposed by the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution that prevents them from going against the party “whip” on pain of disqualification. If they were to vote or abstain from voting against the party whip, they say they would be treated as defectors and consequently lose their seats. Cutting across party lines, four MPs expressed their helplessness in this manner at a conference organised in Delhi by a prominent parliament-watch organisation, a couple of months ago.
However, the MPs have almost never bothered to explain to the people why they have never exercised their right to vote according to the wishes of the people whom they represent or according to their conscience, despite being empowered by the Constitution and the 1985 House Rules to so do.
So the latest news about the alleged swearing of oaths of allegiance in a prominent political party comes as no surprise because the behaviour of most of the MPs in Parliament when it comes to voting on a law or any other motion tabled in the House (when a whip is issued) at least during the last 7 years has always been guided by loyalty to the party diktat and little else. The latest exercise of allegedly swearing allegiance on paper in West Bengal is only a small drama occurring outside the legislature which only confirms the long-held belief that once elected, politicians show greater loyalty to the party they represent instead of the people who elected them.

The RTI interventions reveal poor compliance by political parties with anti-defection related disclosures

In my first round of RTI interventions I also asked for the documents that the political parties represented in either House of Parliament submitted to the respective presiding officers under the respective anti-defection Rules. The Rules of both Houses mentioned above, require all parliamentary parties to submit a list of their members in either House, the competent authorities with whom the presiding officers will communicate for the purpose of dealing with cases of defection and also copies of the parties’ constitutions and their internal rules and regulations.
The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Rajya Sabha Sectt. pointed out that no such information had been submitted by the parliamentary parties since May 2014 (when the current Lok Sabha was constituted). The CPIO of the Lok Sabha Sectt. first invoked Section 7(9) of The Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) and suggested that I inspect the documents because they were voluminous. Later on he supplied copies of the covering letters sent by parliamentary parties which I found during the inspection. The documents obtained from the Lok Sabha Sectt. indicate the following:
1) Only the BJP, Shiv Sena, YSR Congress, LJP, AIUDF, SAD, Apna Dal and JD(U) have indicated who the competent authority is in their parliamentary parties to communicate with the Speaker, Lok Sabha in relation to the anti-defection law. During the inspection, I could not locate the letters of the following political parties about who their authorities are to communicate with the Speaker for the purpose of the anti-defection Rules: Indian National Congress, TDP, TRS, CPI-M, JD(S), All India Trinamool Congress, AIADMK, Samajwadi Party, AAP, J&KPDP, RLSP, INLD, and JMM. I did not seek copies of the list of MPs and the party Constitutions as these are available online and it would have wasted the time and resources of the Lok Sabha Sectt.
2) Of the parliamentary parties that have more than 1 MP in the 16th Lok Sabha, I could not locate the replies of the following parliamentary parties sent to the Sectt. containing their list of MPs, authorities to communicate with Speaker for the the purpose of anti-defection Rules and a copy of the party Constitution: TDP, TRS, CPI-M, All India Trinamool Congress, AIADMK, DMK, SP, J&KPDP, RLSP, INLD and JMM. AAP has only sent a list of its MPs in the Lok Sabha but none of the other required details. The Sectt.’s officials told me that they send reminders regularly to the non-compliant political parties. However, as I had not asked for copies of such letters in my RTI application, they did not show them to me.
These RTI interventions put a question mark on the freedom of MPs to act in Parliament against their party’s diktat. They also reveal how several prominent political parties have not submitted information to the Lok Sabha Sectt. that they are legally required to provide under the anti-defection law despite repeated reminders. The reasons for this non-compliance are best known to the parliamentary parties themselves.

State Legislators are also empowered to vote against the party diktat

The anti-defection law contained in the Tenth Schedule applies to State Legislatures as well. I request readers to make use of RTI to find out whether MLAs have ever voted against the party diktat in the State Legislatures. As several State Legislatures do not even have official websites, it is not possible to find out without RTI interventions whether these Legislatures have even made Rules for implementing the anti-defection provisions of the Constitution. However citizens have the right to know how whether their elected representatives have ever made use of the exception to the anti-defection law to vote against the party’s whip. Readers may use the template of the RTI application contained in the attachments with suitable adaptation for their interventions.
As the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution defines a “Legislature Party”, all legislature parties become “authorities or bodies established under the Constitution”. So in my humble opinion, by logical extension they become “public authorities” under the RTI Act. So readers in India might like to seek information from them directly.

*Programme Coordinator, Access to Information Programme, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, New Delhi



Constitution day makes us remember and rethink the values that India stands for

By Dr. Kapilendra Das*  India, also known as Bharat, was liberated from British rule and gained Independence on August 15, 1947. So every year on 15th August we celebrate Independence Day throughout the country. The Indians felt the taste of freedom, but there were no rules and regulations to govern the country for which British rules were effective up to January 25, 1950. To govern India, the draft constitution was prepared by the Drafting Committee which was published in January 1948, and the same was finally adopted by the Constituent Assembly on 26 November 1949, the day of an important landmark in India’s journey as an independent, Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic, Republic. The constitution so adopted came into force on 26 January 1950. To memorize 26 January, every year we observe Republic Day throughout India. To mark rethinking and remembrance of the day of adoption of the constitution of India, 26 November has been celebrating as “Constituti

Seventh most vulnerable nation, effects of climate change can be seen in Bangladesh

Mashrur Siddique Bhuiyan*  From November 6–18, 2022, Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt is hosting the 27th Conference of Parties (COP27) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. This two-week climate conference is critical for the globe because it occurs at a time when nations are coping with a global energy crisis, the conflict in Ukraine, rising inflation rates, and dwindling funding for climate adaptation. It also has great significance for Bangladesh, as the country's ability to maintain its economic growth depends on raising the necessary finances for urgent climate action and mitigation. This year’s theme is "Delivering for People and the Planet," which aims to hasten global climate action by lowering greenhouse gas emissions, fostering resilience and preparing for climate change's unavoidable effects, and increasing the flow of climate finance to developing nations. The goals of COP27 are based on the outcomes of COP21, which was held in Paris in 2015

Unsung, tens of Morbi youth of local fishing community saved many, many lives

By Rajiv Shah  It was indeed a treat to listen to Bhavik Raja, who spoke at a meeting of the Movement for Secular Democracy the other day in Ahmedabad. Speaking in chaste Gujarati, Raja recalled his childhood days in Mobi when he and his friends would often go to the town's Jhulto Pul (Hanging Bridge) in free time. I listened to him online. The bridge, which should have been given a heritage status, was handed over to the owners of a watch-making tycoon for repair. The repair was carried out so shoddily that it broke down in less than a week after it was opened for general public, leading to the death of more than 140 persons, many of them children. Raja, who formed a group of three-person activists' team on a fact-finding mission to Mobi, said, what isn't taken note of is how tens of youth, belonging to the local Muslim fishing community, jumped into the river and saved many, many lives. It's a marshy river, and to navigate in there is an extremely difficult exercise.

Zakir Naik tumult, Catholic Church power abuse: will Anwar Ibrahim save Malaysia?

Anwar Ibrahim By Jay Ihsan*  Anwar Ibrahim, a hardcore reformist who took a punch to his eye in 1998 from then inspector-general of police, Rahim Noor, has finally been given the mandate by Malaysians to serve as the nation's 10th prime minister. Anwar knows too well the burden of staying true to both trust and faith the people have in him requires every once of commitment and dedication. The question is will he be apologetic for his transgressions enroute to "rebuilding" Malaysia? In his overzealousness to get the job done, Anwar, 75, needs to safeguard every bit of gumption to address prickling issues plaguing the safety of the nation especially those involving communal sensitivities. For one, dare Anwar get rid of terrorist hate preacher and fugitive Zakir Naik for inciting religious unrest in Malaysia? In November 2016, India’s counter-terrorism agency filed an official complaint against Naik, holding him responsible for promoting religious hatred and unlawful activi

Ukraine war revitalizes silent competition between China and Russia in Central Asia

By John P. Ruehl  At the recent Commonwealth for Independent States (CIS) summit held on October 14 in Astana, Kazakhstan, Tajik President Emomali Rahmon expressed previously inconceivable remarks. His public admonishment of Russian President Vladimir Putin to treat Central Asian states with more respect showed the growing confidence of Central Asian leaders amid Russia’s embroilment in Ukraine and China’s expanding regional influence. After coming under Russian imperial rule in the 18th and 19th centuries , five Central Asian states—Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan— emerged independent from the Soviet Union in 1991. While these countries remained heavily dependent on Russia for security, economic, and diplomatic support, China saw an opportunity in their vast resources and potential to facilitate trade across Eurasia. Chinese-backed development and commerce increased after the Soviet collapse and expanded further after the launch of China’s Belt an

Adequate attention not paid on changing human life to realize climate change aim

By Bharat Dogra  Climate change is one of the biggest challenges of our times. It has to be checked as a matter of highest priority. Despite this adequate attention has not been given to how human life must change to realize this objective. We know that fossil fuels must be phased out and replaced by renewable energy. But is renewable energy capable of meeting the present day massive energy requirements, along with the increase taking place? Even if it is, what are the implications if renewable energy has to be scaled up to this level, and at such gigantic level won’t renewable energy also have very adverse consequences, although of a different kind? Such questions make the situation more complicated, but these have to be faced. So let us try to approach the issue in a somewhat different way. Since the daily consumption of various goods and utilities involves the use of fossil fuels in various ways, if all excessive, wasteful and harmful consumption can be given up, this will also lead

Integrating biodiversity for poverty removal still not binding for this UN body

Reacting to a statement of the executive secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity ( CBD ), United Nations, Elizabeth Maruma Mrema, on the occasion of the International Day for the Eradication of Poverty, which fell on October 17, well-known Thiruvananthapuram-based ecologist S Faizi has objected to the CBD’s plan for “effective integration of biodiversity for poverty eradication”. *** I compliment you for issuing this statement . However, I am disappointed to see that the CBD COP's output on poverty and biodiversity, namely the Chennai Guidance is not even referred to in your statement, particularly so since the 12th COP has asked the Executive Secretary to "continue the work requested by the Conference of the Parties in decisions X/6 and XI/22, for the effective integration of biodiversity for poverty eradication and development, taking into account also the related decisions of the Conference of the Parties at its twelfth meeting" and to promote the Chennai

Much like earlier meetings, COP 27 fails to find real solution to overcome climate crisis

By NS Venkataraman* COP 27 in Egypt was organized with much fanfare and expectations, similar to COP 26 at Glasgow that was organised in 2021. While nothing significant was achieved in combating the climate crisis subsequent to the Glasgow Meet, one thought that COP 27 would be more productive and would find some real solutions to overcome the climate crisis. Leaders and representatives from most of the countries participated in the COP 27 including the President of USA, Prime Minister of UK and so many others. Cosmetic speeches were made by the leaders, committing themselves to save the world from global warming and noxious emissions. Finally, resolutions would be adopted after representatives of all countries put their heads together . With no tangible agreement about the fundamental issues, the resolutions would inevitably end up as face saving documents. During COP 27, the UAE President clearly said that the UAE would not reduce production of crude oil and natural gas. In t

Bangladesh to import diesel from India: Win-win situation amidst economic turmoil?

Kamal Uddin Mazumder*  Bangladesh and India had been sharing friendly and warm relations since 1971. Both of the countries have been kith and kin through crisis moments. Bangladesh has witnessed India’s support from the liberation war to the Covid-19 pandemic. As now the world is facing the repercussions of the pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war through the economic crisis and the energy crisis, India is still with Bangladesh through a cooperative framework. The government of Bangladesh had decided to cut down its fuel consumption to keep up with the global energy crisis. It was necessary to import fuel at the cheapest possible rate to mitigate the crisis. Some talks had been initiated with countries like Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, and Brunei but India came forward first. The geographical proximity and the longest shared border had ushered multidimensional ways of cooperation and collaboration in many areas. The import of diesel from India through the pipeline is one of the prime example

Maldives migrants' death: Govt bodies haven't done enough for workers' safety, security

By Kirity Roy*  We have been notified by the media that a hazardous fire, which erupted in a cramped neighborhood of Maldivian capital Male, has killed 10 migrant workers including 9 Indians. We are much aggrieved by this incident, and sending our heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims. Many are missing. Almost half the population in the Maldivian capital constitutes of migrant workers, and out of them many are Indians. During the COVID-19 pandemic it was reported by many media outlets that due to the cramped and unsuitable living conditions, the disease spread more rapidly among the foreign workers than anywhere else in the country. This brought the light upon the serious housing problem for the migrant workers in the country. The current incident shows that the Government bodies have not done enough to ensure safety and security for the workers. While the United Nations have established the rights of the Migrant workers through the International Convention on the Prot