The Centre told the Supreme Court on Tuesday to lay its hands off any attempt to debar politicians for life after they get convicted for an offence punishable with over two years sentence. At present, any MlA or MP convicted in such a crime is debarred for the remaining of his term and for a period of six years hence.
An affidavit filed by the Ministry of law and Justice in response to a PIl seeking electoral reforms and de-criminalisation of politics also opposed any move prescribing a minimum educational qualification for elected representatives.
Such decision would leave a large section of society disenfranchised, claimed the Centre in its response filed on Tuesday. The Bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Navin Sinha will decide on the future course of the PIl filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay on July 10, the next date of hearing in the case.
Dealing with the the petition seeking a life ban on convicted politicians from contesting elections, the Bench wished to know the stand of the Centre since the Election Commission filed an affidavit earlier supporting the petitioner.
The affidavit by the law Ministry shot down any proposal to tinker with the existing framework of disqualification for MPs/MlAs provided under Articles 102 and 191 of Constitution and Section 8 of the Representation of People Act 1951. “The above sets the parameters for disqualification of the Members of the Parliament and the State legislature and these limits are constitutionally prescribed and hence no further restrictions of disqualifications can be implied or read into these.”
The petition even sought to fix a minimum education qualification on candidates entering Parliament and State Assemblies along with setting a maximum age limit. The Centre did not favour any such suggestion. On the contrary, it said the issue fell within the legislative domain as it required an amendment to Article 83 and 173 of Constitution laying down qualifications of MPs/MlAs respectively.
“There cannot be a mandamus (by Constitutional courts) asking the Government to make a law or introduce amendments to an existing law and hence this prayer is also for a relief that cannot be granted by the Courts,” the Government replied. It gave an added reason to scuttle the petitioner’s suggestion. If such a prayer is to be granted, Centre submitted, “it will disenfranchise a huge part of the country’s population as many people have not had the benefit of organised education.”