criminalisation of politics essay upsc

Shopping Cart

No products in the cart.

Criminalization of Politics in India: Causes, Effects, Measures

From Current Affairs Notes for UPSC » Editorials & In-depths » This topic

* Updates at the bottom

The rising percentage of members of parliament who have a criminal background: 2004 – 24%, 2009 – 30%, 2014 – 34% and 2019 -43%. Around 50% of MPs in the new Lok Sabha have criminal records. This increasing number of members with criminal records in parliament endangers the survival of any true democracy. In this article, you will learn everything about the criminalisation of politics viz- what, why, causes, consequences, measures, challenges, solutions, and also the verdict of SC regarding criminal politics.

This topic of “Criminalization of Politics in India: Causes, Effects, Measures” is important from the perspective of the UPSC IAS Examination , which falls under General Studies Portion.

What is the Criminalisation of Politics?

The criminalisation of politics refers to the increasing participation of criminals in the electoral process and selection of the same as elected representatives of the people.

Express Learning Programme (ELP)

• Optional Notes
• Study Hacks
• Prelims Sureshots (Repeated Topic Compilations)
• Current Affairs (Newsbits, Editorials & In-depths)
• Ancient Indian History
• Medieval Indian History
• Modern Indian History
• Post-Independence Indian History
• World History
• Art & Culture
• Geography (World & Indian)
• Indian Society & Social Justice
• Indian Polity
• International Relations
• Indian Economy
• Environment 
• Agriculture
• Internal Security
• Disasters & its Management
• General Science – Biology
• General Studies (GS) 4 – Ethics
• Syllabus-wise learning
• Political Science
• Anthropology
• Public Administration

SIGN UP NOW

What is the status of Criminal Politics in India?

• The criminalisation of politics is one of the primary concerns in India as many politicians facing charges of murder, corruption , abduction, and rape continue to be legislators.
• Around 1/3 rd the members of the current parliament have criminal cases filed against them.
• Data suggests that voters don’t mind electing candidates facing criminal cases.

Prelims Sureshots – Most Probable Topics for UPSC Prelims

A Compilation of the Most Probable Topics for UPSC Prelims, including Schemes, Freedom Fighters, Judgments, Acts, National Parks, Government Agencies, Space Missions, and more. Get a guaranteed 120+ marks!

How did Indian politics become criminalized?

Muscle power:.

• Muscle power has been ingrained into Indian politics for a very long time.
• Many politicians are thriving today based on muscle power provided by criminals.
• Such politicians chose muscle power in order to gain a vote bank in the country.

Money Power:

• It is a well-accepted fact that huge election costs are the major cause of corruption in India.
• A candidate spends lakhs of rupees to get elected and even if he gets elected, the total salary he gets during his term as a legislator will be meager compared to his election expenses.
• However, criminal activities help in generating a huge amount of money to fund the elections.

Loopholes in the functioning of elections:

The voters are generally not aware of the history of the candidate, qualifications, and cases pending against him.

Weak Judicial System & Denial of Justice:

A huge pile of cases is pending in District courts, High Courts, and Supreme Court against these criminal cum politicians.

Why criminal politics is a grave concern?

• It reveals the low ethical and moral values of our legislators which leads to the enactment of arbitrary and discriminatory laws.
• Misusing executives for personal gains and undermining the law of the land.
• The quality of candidates contesting elections is important for better governance.
• Loss of public faith in the government as well as judiciary since courts failed to contain it.
• It affects the efficiency of legislatures leading to poor governance.

What are the measures taken?

The Supreme Court and Election Commission of India (ECI) have taken some commendable measures to reform the electoral process as follows.

ECI’s reforms

• ECI has achieved substantial success in controlling the role of muscle power via measures like the effective implementation of the model code of conduct and also established the Expense Monitoring Cell.
• Mandatory declaration of assets and existing criminal charges in self-sworn affidavits to the ECI prior to elections has brought in some transparency.

The Supreme Court’s verdicts

• Criminal records
• Financial records
• Educational qualifications

If the candidate fails to file any of the above three declarations, the Returning Officer will have the right to reject his nomination papers. SC ruled that all three declarations will have to be truthful.

• SC in (Lily Thomas Vs Union of India 2013) declared that upon conviction, charge-sheeted MPs and MLAs would be disqualified with immediate effect from holding membership of the house, without being given 3 months to appeal.
• SC in 2014 accepted the Law Commission recommendations and passed an order directing that trials against sitting MPs and MLAs should be concluded within a year of charges being framed and conducted on a day-to-day basis.
• Some other attempts by the judiciary: prohibiting those in jail from contesting elections, directing the EC to bring the issue of election-related freebies under the ambit of the Code of Conduct, the Allahabad High Court banning caste, and religion-based political rallies.
• Recent SC verdict: The judgement was given over the much-awaited pronouncement on the petitions asking it to prohibit politicians facing the heinous criminal charges against rape, murder, and kidnapping from contesting elections.

Centre’s measures

In 2017, the Union government started a scheme to establish 12 special courts for a year to fast-track the trial of criminal cases against 1,581 MPs and MLAs.

How effective were those measures?

• Debarring of politicians has no effect since rates of conviction are too low and trials themselves are subject to long delays as showcased by a recent Law Commission report.
• Many politicians are filing false affidavits about their annual income, wealth details.
• About 90% of cases transferred to the special courts set up under the Centre’s scheme are pending as of now.

What are the key features of the  SC verdict on Criminal Politics?

Political parties.

• SC’s Observation – The rapid criminalization of politics cannot be solved through the mere disqualification of criminal legislators. Cleaning politics from criminal elements starts only by means of purifying political parties themselves. Since political parties are the major institution of Indian democracy, they play an important role in the interface between private citizens and the government. They act as a medium through which interests and problems of the people are showcased in Parliament.
• SC’s verdict – The Supreme Court ordered the political parties to publish the pending criminal cases of their candidates online.
• It asked the Parliament to create a strong law in order to cleanse political parties of leaders facing trials for serious crimes.
• Such a law should make it mandatory for political parties to remove leaders accused of “heinous and grievous” crimes.
• Parties must reject tickets to criminal elements in both parliamentary and Assembly polls.
• The Bench also made it clear that the court cannot make law for Parliament by providing disqualification to prohibit such candidates from contesting elections.
• SC declared that the candidates should disclose their criminal cases against them to the Election Commission in BLOCK LETTERS as well as to their respective political parties.
• The parties, in turn, should publish the full details of their candidate on their websites for public view.

What are the concerns with the judgement?

• The SC has passed the burden to the ECI, although the ECI has been asking for the apex court’s aid for the past two decades.
• Parliament is required to make a law on the matter as per Article 101 (1) of the constitution, however, Parliament regardless of who is in power has always been reluctant to legislate on the issue.
• The bench pronounced that it is not in a position to enable disqualification of candidates who face criminal charges thus withdrawing from its responsibility to solve the issue.
• Voters do not generally read the websites of political parties.
• The recommendation regarding the publicity campaigns about the criminal background of candidates by political parties sounds unreasonable.
• The definition of heinous crimes may change as per times and societal conditions.

What more could be done?

• A law to prohibit candidates who are charged with heinous crimes will need a broad consensus across the party lines.
• More fast-track courts to try the cases dealing with serious charges against the candidates.
• To reduce money power,
• To create a level playing field,
• To enable public-spirited people to contest elections thereby ensuring equality of opportunities,
• To break the political-corporate nexus thereby ending rent-seeking and crony capitalism.
• To change the election’s focus towards people’s problems rather than on raising funds through illegitimate means, i.e., focus on development politics.
• Stricter implementation of anti-corruption laws.
• Transparency and audit mechanisms.
• Representation of Peoples Act (RPA) needs to be amended and there should be stricter actions against serious offenders.
• Election Commission should be given more power to deal with corruption cases.
• Inner party democracy needs to be improved.

Supreme Court has done its part in decriminalizing Indian politics. But SC or Election Commission cannot decriminalize politics single-handed since they require support from Legislation too. Hence it is in the hands of the Parliament to frame a law that decriminalizes Indian politics effectively.

In the words of Dr. Rajendra Prasad , “A constitution like a machine is a lifeless thing. It acquires life because of the men who control it and operate it”. Therefore good and quality politicians are needed for India to become a vibrant democracy through good governance .

Practice Question:

• The criminalization of politics is a disease that poses a grave threat to our democracy if left unchecked. Discuss the initiatives taken to check criminal politics and examine the effectiveness of those initiatives.
• April 25, 2023: The killing of Atiq Ahmed , a notorious criminal turned politician in India, highlighted the issue of criminalization of politics in the country. Nearly 40% of the current Indian Parliament members have criminal cases pending against them, with many not feeling threatened due to the slow pace of trials.

GET MONTHLY COMPILATIONS

Related Posts

Anti-Doping Regulations in India – Ensuring Ethics in Sports

A reductionist approach

Children of incarcerated parents – The need for a child-centric approa...

Holistic article,great job??

There was a problem reporting this post.

Block Member?

Please confirm you want to block this member.

You will no longer be able to:

• See blocked member's posts
• Mention this member in posts

Please allow a few minutes for this process to complete.

General Studies

All Programmes

Study Material

Criminalization of Politics

What is ‘criminalization of politics’ and its status in india, what are the reasons for the criminalization of politics in india, what are the legal and constitutional tools to deal with the criminalization of politics in india, what are the outcomes of criminalization of the indian political landscape, what are the various measures taken to deal with the issue of criminalization of politics in india, what are the ways to decriminalize indian politics.

Prelims:    Indian Polity and Governance – Constitution, Political System, Panchayati Raj, Public Policy, Rights Issues, etc.

Mains :   Salient Features of the Representation of People’s Act,  Appointment to various Constitutional Posts, Powers, Functions and Responsibilities of various Constitutional Bodies.

In India, the Criminalization of politics has become a growing concern, with a significant number of elected officials facing criminal charges. This has led to public distrust in the political system and the perception that politicians use their power to evade the law.

The criminalization of politics refers to the involvement of individuals with a criminal record in the political arena. This can involve criminals running for and be elected to positions in Parliament and State Legislatures. It often occurs due to the close relationship between politicians and criminal elements.

Association of Democratic Reforms(ADR) report reveals that in the 2014 General Elections for the 16th Lok Sabha, 186 (34%) out of the 541 winners had criminal cases filed against them. This is a jump from the numbers for the 2009 elections, when, out of the 521 winners, 158 (30%) had declared criminal cases.

There are several factors contributing to the criminalization of the political landscape in India:

• Muscle power: For winnability, Political parties can even hire or nominate criminals as candidates because of their influence. Many politicians chose muscle power to gain a vote bank in the country.
• Money power: Political parties and candidates use the money generated by criminal activities to influence voters, secure their support, and win elections. There also exists a quid pro quo between politicians and criminals to exchange favours or benefits.
• Loopholes in the functioning of the election machinery: The voters are not usually aware of the history of the candidate, qualifications, and cases pending against him.  
• Ineffective judicial system & delayed justice: The thousands and thousands of cases are pending in District Courts, High Courts, and Supreme Court against these criminals cum politicians.
• Lack of enforcement: Several laws and court judgments have not helped much due to the lack of enforcement of laws and judgments.
• Vested interests: Publishing the criminal history of candidates fielded by political parties may be ineffective, as a major chunk of voters tend to vote through a narrow prism of community interests like caste or religion.
• Politico-criminal nexus: This nexus between politicians and criminals, such as organized crime syndicates, drug cartels, etc, helps to advance their own interests or to gain power and influence.
• Indian Constitution does not specify what disqualifies a person from contesting elections for the Parliament, Legislative assembly, or any other legislature.
• In the present scenario, under the Representation of Peoples (RP) Act 1951, lawmakers cannot contest elections only after their conviction in a criminal case.
• Section 8 of the act, i.e., disqualification on conviction for certain offenses, according to which an individual punished with a jail term of more than two years cannot stand in an election for six years after the jail term has ended.
• The Election Commission of India, under the Representation of the People Act 1951, can remove or reduce the period of a person’s disqualification.

The criminalization of politics can have negative effects on democracy and the rule of law. It creates an environment where politicians and political parties engage in corrupt practices and undermines the trust of citizens in the political system. 

• Impediment to Development: Criminalization of politics can act as an impediment to development, as politicians with criminal backgrounds may prioritize their own interests over the welfare of the people.
• Weakening of Democratic Institutions: The presence of criminals in politics can also weaken democratic institutions, as they may try to manipulate the system to their advantage.
• Impact on the Principle of Free and Fair Election: Criminalization of Politics goes against the principles of a free and fair election by limiting the options for voters to choose a deserving candidate.
• Impairing Good Governance : The issue of criminal elements becoming elected officials undermines the democratic process and hampers the delivery of good governance.
• Affecting Integrity of Public Servants: It also leads to increased circulation of black money during and after elections, which in turn increases corruption in society and affects the working of public servants.
• Causes Social Disharmony: It introduces a culture of violence in society and sets a bad precedent for the youth to follow, and reduces people's faith in democracy as a system of governance.
• Erodes Public Trust: Criminalization of politics erodes the public confidence in elected politicians who indulge in criminal activities.

Supreme Court  

• Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2002): Supreme Court issued an order directing every candidate seeking election to the Parliament or a State Legislature to declare the criminal antecedents, assets, etc.
• Immediate Disqualification of Convicted MPs and MLAs: The Supreme Court, in Lily Thomas case(2013) , held that charge-sheeted Members of Parliament and MLAs, on conviction for offenses, will be immediately disqualified from holding membership of the House without being given three months’ time for appeal, as was the case before. 
• Fast Track Trial: The Supreme Court in March 2014 accepted the recommendations of the Law Commission and passed an order directing that trials against sitting MPs and MLAs must be concluded within a year of charges being framed.
• Public Interest Foundation v. Union of India (2019): In this case, the Supreme Court of India ordered political parties to publish the criminal records of their candidates on their websites, social media handles, and newspapers.

Election Commission of India

• Booth Capturing: In 1989, a provision was made for the adjournment of polls or countermanding elections in case of booth capturing. Booth capturing includes seizure and taking possession of polling stations, threatening and preventing any elector from going to polling stations.
• Prohibition of Arms: Entering into the neighbourhood of a polling station with any kind of arms is considered a cognizable offense.
• Curbing Muscle Power: The ECI has achieved considerable success in containing the role of muscle power through measures such as the effective implementation of the model code of conduct.
• Model Code of Conduct(MCC): The Model Code of Conduct is implemented by the Election Commission, from time to time, by using its constitutional powers under Article 324.
• Affidavits: Mandatory declaration of assets and existing criminal charges in affidavits to the ECI prior to elections has brought in some transparency.
• Strict Legal Provisions like Lifetime Ban: The election commission endorsed the call for a lifetime ban in the apex court. It had argued that such a move would “champion the cause of decriminalization of politics”.
• Proactive Judiciary: Given the reluctance by the political parties to curb the criminalization of politics and its growing detrimental effects on Indian democracy, Indian courts must now seriously consider banning people accused of serious criminal charges from contesting elections.
• Active Citizenry: Voters should also be aware of the potential to misuse funds, gifts, and other incentives during elections.
• State Funding of Elections: Various committees, such as Dinesh Goswami(1990) and Inderjeet Committee(1988), on the electoral reforms, have recommended state funding of elections which will curb the use of black money to a large extent and thereby will have a significant impact on limiting criminalization of politics.
• Strengthening Election Commission: Regulating the affairs of a political party is essential for a cleaner electoral process. Therefore, it is imperative to strengthen the Election Commission of India and ensure its independence.

Previous Year Questions(PYQs)

Q) Consider the following statements: (2020)

• According to the Constitution of India, a person who is eligible to vote can be made a minister in a State for six months even if he/she is not a member of the Legislature of that State.
• According to the Representation of People Act, 1951, a person convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to imprisonment for five years is permanently disqualified from contesting an election even after his release from prison.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(c) Both 1 and 2

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Frequently Asked Questions(FAQs)

Q)   is model code of conduct enforceable through law.

No, Model Code of Conduct is not enforceable through any law. However, the Election Commission can take action by using its wide powers under Article 324.

Q) Can a person, who is convicted, contest the elections after completing his/her sentence?

According to Representation of People’s 1951, Individuals punished with a jail term of more than two years cannot stand in an election for six years after the jail term has ended. The Election Commission has endorsed multiple times for lifetime ban for the convicted person.

© 2024 Vajiram & Ravi. All rights reserved

• Advait Resources
• Answer Writing
• Daily MCQ's

CRIMINALISATION OF POLITICS

Context: In the wake of escalating tensions in Sandeshkhali, North 24 Parganas district , recent protests erupted due to accusations of land seizure and sexual violence against women, leading to demands for the detention of local TMC leader Shahjahan Sheikh and his cohorts. Police have detained 18 individuals, including TMC's Shibaprasad Hazra and Uttam Sardar, related to the disturbances.

Charges including 'gang rape' and 'attempted murder' have been filed against three main suspects, with one still evading capture. This incident highlights the growing criminalization in India's political landscape, significantly diminishing trust in the political system and creating an impression of impunity among those in authority.

Criminalisation of Politics

Political Criminalization means Involvement of individuals with criminal records in politics, evident through their nominations and elections to Parliament and State Legislatures, fueled by a mutually beneficial relationship with criminal entities.

  ADR Report Findings: A shocking 44% of the 4,001 state assembly legislators across India are implicated in criminal cases, as per the Association of Democratic Reforms.

National Level Concerns: In the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, 43% of MPs faced criminal charges, a significant rise from 34% in 2014.

 Asset Growth Analysis: The wealth of 71 MPs who were re-elected to the Lok Sabha from 2009 to 2019 increased by an average of nearly 300%, highlighting potential concerns over their financial integrity and the influence of money in politics.

Factors Influencing Criminalisation of Politics:

Prioritizing Winnability: Political parties often choose candidates with criminal backgrounds for their ability to secure votes through intimidation, prioritizing electoral success over ethical considerations.

  Use of Coercion: Candidates employ force to build a loyal voter base and strengthen their political position, especially in areas where electoral violence and intimidation are prevalent .

 Exploiting Criminal Funds: Political entities use money obtained from criminal activities to influence elections, buy votes, and ensure victory, benefiting from the financial clout of illicit operations.

  Lack of Candidate Transparency: The electoral system's failures prevent voters from accessing full details on candidates' criminal records, leading to uninformed voting choices.

Judicial Delays: The slow pace of justice in courts allows individuals with criminal backgrounds to continue their political careers without facing consequences, undermining the rule of law.

Weak Enforcement: Inadequate implementation of laws and court orders aimed at reducing political criminalization limits their effectiveness, allowing criminal elements to remain active in politics.

Community Bias in Voting: Voters often prioritize caste or religious loyalty over candidates' ethical backgrounds, diminishing the impact of revealing criminal records.

Entrenched Criminal-Political Ties: Deep-rooted connections between politicians and criminal networks facilitate mutual benefits but erode democratic values and challenge law enforcement efforts.

Outcomes of Criminalisation of Politics

Erosion of Democratic Trust: The presence of criminals in elected positions diminishes the foundational trust in democracy, leading to skepticism about the system's effectiveness and purpose.

Impact on Governance Quality: Leadership roles filled by individuals with criminal records often result in poor governance, as these figures may lack the necessary skills and ethical standards, focusing instead on personal enrichment.

Cultivation of a Culture of Impunity: The normalization of criminal behaviour among politicians encourages a belief in consequence-free wrongdoing, potentially leading to higher crime rates and weakened law adherence.

Increase in Corruption: Criminal politicians are more likely to engage in corrupt practices, perpetuating cycles of bribery, fraud, and misappropriation, thus damaging the integrity of governmental institutions.

Barrier to Economic Progress: The pervasive corruption and mismanagement associated with criminal politicians deter investments, slowing economic development and exacerbating societal disparities.

Obstacle to Social Advancement: Corrupt governance hampers social development projects, affecting healthcare, education, and welfare, with disproportionate effects on disadvantaged groups.

Damage to International Image: Political criminalization harms India's global reputation, affecting diplomatic relations and international cooperation.

Undermining Electoral Integrity: The involvement of criminals in politics limits voter choice and violates the principles of free and fair elections, compromising the democracy's legitimacy.

Erosion of Democratic Institutions: Criminal involvement in politics undermines the strength of democratic frameworks, manipulating systems for personal gain and undermining legal and accountability standards.

Corruption Among Public Officials: Electoral corruption, including the flow of illicit funds, compromises the integrity of public servants and diminishes faith in public institutions.

Social Unrest: Acceptance of violence and criminality in the political arena disrupts societal harmony and undermines faith in democracy as an effective system of governance.

Legal and Constitutional means dealing with Criminalisation of Politics: While the Indian Constitution doesn’t explicitly outline disqualification criteria for contesting elections, it provides the foundation for legislative measures aimed at addressing the issue of criminalization in politics.

Representation of Peoples (RP) Act 1951:

Under the Representation of Peoples Act (RP) 1951, individuals are barred from running in elections only if they have been convicted in a criminal case.

The RP Act 1951 outlines the eligibility criteria for election candidates, including disqualifications for those convicted of certain offenses under Section 8 .

According to Section 8, a person sentenced to imprisonment for over two years is ineligible to contest in elections for six years following the completion of their sentence .

The Election Commission of India has the authority , as per the Representation of the People Act 1951, to either cancel or shorten the disqualification period for a candidate .

Election Commission of India

Booth Capturing Deterrence : 

The Election Commission of India (ECI) took decisive action in 1989 by introducing provisions allowing for the adjournment or countermanding of elections in cases of booth capturing. 

This proactive measure aims to combat the illegal seizure and control of polling stations, ensuring the integrity of the electoral process and safeguarding voters’ rights.

Arms Prohibition Enforcement: 

The ECI rigorously enforces regulations prohibiting the presence of arms in the vicinity of polling stations, recognizing the potential for intimidation and violence to disrupt the electoral process. 

This strict stance against armed individuals near polling sites serves to uphold the safety and security of voters and election personnel.

Muscle Power Mitigation: 

Through effective implementation of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), the ECI has made significant strides in curbing the influence of muscle power in elections. 

By enforcing guidelines that govern the behaviour of political parties and candidates during the electoral process , the ECI fosters an environment conducive to free and fair elections, minimizing coercion and intimidation tactics.

Model Code of Conduct Empowerment: 

Utilizing its constitutional authority under Article 324 , the ECI proactively implements the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) to regulate the conduct of political parties and candidates during elections . 

This authoritative framework governs various aspects of electioneering, including campaign behaviour, speech content, and expenditure limits, ensuring fairness and transparency throughout the electoral cycle.

Affidavit Accountability Enhancement: 

Mandating the submission of affidavits detailing assets and criminal charges to the ECI prior to elections represents a significant step towards transparency and accountability in the electoral process. 

By requiring candidates to disclose pertinent information, the ECI empowers voters with crucial insights into the backgrounds of their representatives , fostering informed decision-making and promoting electoral integrity.

Supreme Court of India

Transparency Mandate (2002): Mandated election candidates to disclose criminal records and assets, enhancing voter awareness and transparency.

Immediate Disqualification Protocol (2013): Established immediate disqualification for convicted MPs and MLAs, eliminating appeal grace periods and ensuring faster accountability.

Judicial Expediency Directive (2014): Instituted fast-track trials for elected officials to conclude within a year, promoting swift justice and accountability.

Enhanced Public Awareness (2019): Required political parties to publish candidates' criminal records , improving voter information and fostering accountability in elections.

Way Forward:

Lifetime Ban Enforcement: Advocated by the Election Commission and supported by the apex court, to deter criminals from contesting elections, enhancing political integrity.

Judicial Proactivity for Accountability: Courts to actively bar candidates with serious criminal charges from elections, maintaining electoral integrity and protecting democracy.

Electoral Awareness Promotion: Educating citizens on electoral misuse and encouraging active participation to prevent illicit practices, ensuring transparency.

State Funding Advocacy: Recommended by reform committees to minimize black money's influence by reducing dependency on private funds, promoting fair elections.

Election Commission Empowerment: Essential to strengthen and maintain its independence, enabling effective regulation and deterrence of criminal elements in politics.

Citizen Vigilance: Emphasizes the role of informed and vigilant voters in combating political criminalization, upholding democratic values of transparency and integrity.

• TRP for UPSC Personality Test
• Interview Mentorship Programme – 2023
• Daily News & Analysis
• Daily Current Affairs Quiz
• Baba’s Explainer
• Dedicated TLP Portal
• 60 Day – Rapid Revision (RaRe) Series – 2024
• English Magazines
• Hindi Magazines
• Yojana & Kurukshetra Gist
• Gurukul Foundation
• Gurukul Advanced
• TLP Connect – 2025
• TLP (+) Plus – 2025
• Integrated Learning Program (ILP) – 2025
• TLP Plus – 2024
• Public Administration FC – 2024
• Anthropology Foundation Course
• Anthropology Optional Test Series
• Sociology Foundation Course – 2024
• Sociology Test Series – 2023
• Geography Optional Foundation Course
• Geography Optional Test Series – Coming Soon!
• PSIR Foundation Course
• PSIR Test Series – Coming Soon
• ‘Mission ಸಂಕಲ್ಪ’ – KPSC Foundation Course
• ‘Mission ಸಂಕಲ್ಪ’ – KPSC Prelims Crash Course
• CTI (COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR) Test Series & Video Classes
• Monthly Magazine

Criminalisation of Politics

• February 15, 2020

UPSC Articles

Topic: General Studies 2: Statutory, regulatory and various quasi-judicial bodies Elections: Salient features of the Representation of People’s Act.

A two Judge Bench of Supreme Court delivered a Judgment on the contempt petitions regarding non-compliance of the directions of a Constitution Bench of SC in Public Interest Foundation and Ors. v. Union of India, 2018

The 2018 Judgement had given the following pronouncements

• There is lack of information about rising criminalisation of Politics among the citizenry
• Rapid Criminalisation of Politics cannot be arrested by merely disqualifying tainted legislators but should begin by cleansing Political Parties
• Ordered Political Parties to publish the criminal details of their candidates in their respective websites and print as well as electronic media for public awareness.

Increase in the incidence of criminals in politics

The Court in its present judgement issued the following directions in exercise of its constitutional powers under Articles 129 and 142: 

• It shall be mandatory for political parties [at the Central and State election level] to upload on their website detailed information regarding individuals with pending criminal cases, who have been selected as candidates. They also have to mention reasons for such selection over people with clean background
• The reasons as to selection of candidates shall be with reference to the qualifications, achievements and merit of the candidate concerned, and not mere “winnability” at the polls
• This information shall also be published in newspaper (one local & one national) and on the official social media platforms of the political party, including Facebook & Twitter.
• These details shall be published within 48 hours of the selection of the candidate or not less than two weeks before the first date for filing of nominations, whichever is earlier.
• The political party concerned shall then submit a report of compliance with these directions with the Election Commission within 72 hours of the selection of the said candidate.
• Non-compliance of these directions shall be brought to notice of SC by Election Commission on the grounds of Contempt of Court

Merits of the Judgement

• It is in line with a series of judgments aimed at preserving the purity of the election process : Asset disclosure, NOTA option, Special courts for quick disposal of cases involving elected representatives
• It increases the information available for Citizens which enables him to take informed choice while choosing his representative.
• Helps bring structural changes in electoral system which are long-term in nature

Criticism of the Judgement

• Judicial Overreach: An election is an issue to be decided between parties, candidates and the voters. The courts should have no say in the matter, except in particular cases where the Representation of the People Act is violated
• Threatens autonomy of Election System: By making them enforceable under Article 142 of the Constitution – failure to produce demanded documents risks attracting Contempt of Court – SC threatens to undermine the autonomy of the system of elections and elected legislature.
• Infringe on ECI: Candidates are already required to file their details in affidavits with the Election Commission. This order could infringe upon the role of the poll watchdog.
• Selection of candidates is subjective matter : The suitability of candidates is a subjective matter, and the justification required by the SC can only be an opinion, and not an objective fact, making the court’s order effectively unenforceable. 

SC is in danger of overstepping limits and boundaries, rather it should be limiting itself to exerting moral force on political parties. De-criminalisation of politics cannot be achieved by judicial fiat alone, rather there has to be changes from within the Political parties.

Connecting the dots!

• Internal Democracy of the Political Parties
• Decline in the institution of Parliament

For a dedicated peer group, Motivation & Quick updates, Join our official telegram channel – https://t.me/IASbabaOfficialAccount

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel HERE to watch Explainer Videos, Strategy Sessions, Toppers Talks & many more…

• GENERAL STUDIES (GS) PAPER 2 , Governance

Related Posts :

Indian pangolin, digital id systems and algorithmic governance.

• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam – 2nd July 2024
• MAINS MENTORSHIP with Mohan Sir (Founder, IASbaba) – UPSC Mains 2024!
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 2nd July 2024
• IASbaba’s TLP 2024 (Phase 2): UPSC Mains Answer Writing – GS2 Questions [2nd July, 2024] – Day 9
• [PRELIMS RESULT] UPSC/IAS Civil Services Examination, Prelims 2024 Result Declared!
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam – 1st July 2024
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 1st July 2024
• [New Batch] ILP 2025 – INTEGRATED LEARNING PROGRAM – The Most Comprehensive and Trusted 365 Days Plan recommended by Toppers for UPSC 2025 – With Surprising Features – Video Classes and Mentorship!
• IASbaba’s TLP 2024 (Phase 2): UPSC Mains Answer Writing – GS2 Questions [1st July, 2024] – Day 8
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam –29th June 2024

Don’t lose out on any important Post and Update. Learn everyday with Experts!!

Email Address

Search now.....

Sign up to receive regular updates.

Sign Up Now !

[email protected]

• Our Centers Delhi Bhubaneswar Lucknow

CURRENT AFFAIRS FOR UPSC IAS

SC ruling on Criminalisation of Politics

Published: 9th Mar, 2020

The Supreme Court has ordered political parties to publish the entire criminal history of their candidates for Assembly and Lok Sabha elections along with the reasons that goaded them to field suspected criminals over decent people.

• The information should be published in a local and a national newspaper as well as the parties’ social media handles.
• It should mandatorily be published either within 48 hours of the selection of candidates or less than two weeks before the first date for filing of nominations, whichever is earlier.
• It ordered political parties to submit compliance reports with the Election Commission of India within 72 hours or risk contempt of court action.
• The judgment applies to parties both at the Central and State levels.
• The published information on the criminal antecedents of a candidate should be detailed and include the nature of the offences, charges framed against him, the court concerned and the case number.

Rationale behind the publishing of criminal records of the candidates

• Increasing criminalization of politics in India: 
• In 2004, 24% of the Members of Parliament had criminal cases pending against them; in 2009, that went up to 30%; in 2014 to 34%; and in 2019 as many as 43% of MPs had criminal cases pending against them.
• Criminals often facing heinous charges like rape and murder, encroaching into the country's political and electoral scenes.
• To ensure the accountability of political parties and enhance transparency.
• Right to know: Lack of information about such criminalization among the citizenry hampers citizen’s right to know and is a threat to the basic structure of the constitution.
• Many political parties observed that the SC’s decision is a step in the right direction. However, unless it is backed by a penal provision, it would be nothing but a cosmetic exercise. Instead, according to them, the SC should have asked the centre to frame laws taking into consideration other aspects of political reforms such as putting a cap on expenditure incurred during elections by political parties, etc.
• Others have questioned the quantum of crime in the cases filed against political leaders, stressing that many of them were due to political rivalry, and that apex court transgressed boundaries.
• On the other hand, left parties lauded the larger cause of electoral reforms but called the SC judgment as impractical in real terms. According to them, a large number of cases are filed against political activists. Even a case registered under Section 144 of the IPC is considered a criminal offence. Whereby, sedition cases are being filed against several Opposition leaders.
• Further, they pointed out that Left leaders in trade unions face several cases as they are in continuous conflict with the management. They can’t be equated with criminals. The judicial system has its fallacies. Thousands of serious criminal cases are pending before courts. Therefore, this judgment should not be seen in isolation from the ground reality.
• However, it must be underscored that the de-criminalisation of politics cannot be achieved by judicial fiat alone. 
• The political class has to respond to the challenge. Parties would probably justify their choice of candidates by pointing out that the law now bars only those convicted and not those facing charges, however serious they may be. Besides, they are apt to dismiss all pending cases as “politically motivated”. 
• Beyond this debate, a larger question looms about the significance of more information on the background of candidates, if voters back a particular leader or party without reference to the record of the candidates fielded. 

Way forward

• A legislative option is to amend the law to bar from contest those against whom charges have been framed.
•  A more meaningful option would be for parties to refrain from giving a ticket to such candidates. 
• Further, in this regard, making parliamentary legislation to curb criminalisation of politics may help to deliver constitutional governance.

More Articles

Verifying, please be patient.

Our Centers

DELHI (Karol Bagh)

GS SCORE, 1B, Second Floor, Pusa Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi - 110005 (Beside Karol Bagh Metro Station Gate No. 8)

Get directions on Google Maps

BHUBANESWAR (Jaydev Vihar)

GS SCORE, Plot No.2298, Jaydev Vihar Square, Near HCG Day Care, BBSR - 751013

LUCKNOW (Aliganj)

GS SCORE, 2nd Floor, B-33, Sangam Chauraha, Sector H, Aliganj, Lucknow, UP - 226024

Delhi (Karol Bagh) Centre

GS SCORE, Second Floor, Metro Tower, 1B, Pusa Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi - 110005 (Beside Karol Bagh Metro Station Gate No. 8)

Email: [email protected]

Phone: +91 8448496262

Classroom / online / Live programs

• Mains Classes
• Mains Advance Classes
• Ethics & Essay Classes
• IAS Foundation
• Aadhar:NCERT Foundation
• Target PT:Prelims Classes
• Current Affairs Mentorship Program
• Optional Classes
• Optional Q&A (TEST SERIES & Mentorship)
• Mains Previous Year Questions

TEST SERIES/ MENTORSHIP

• ITS:Integrated Test Series & Mentorship
• GS Mains Q&A (Mentorship & Test Series)
• GS Test Series
• Ethics & Essay Test Series
• Samarth - Mains Answer Writing

STUDY MATERIAL

• Prelims Study Material
• Mains Study Material
• Mains Answer Writing Workbook
• Meet the Mentor
• Terms & Conditions
• © 2024 - IAS SCORE

All Rights Reserved.

Welcome to our secure login portal. Access your account with ease.

• Using Password

Not registered yet? register here!

Welcome to our secure register portal. For a brighter future, register now and unlock endless learning opportunities.

User Register

Already have an account? Login

Oops, forgot your password? Don't worry, we've got you covered. Reset it here

Lost your login details? No problem! forgot your password in just a few clicks

Forgot Password

Verify your mobile number, you have successfully logged in.

Join Us on WhatsApp

Criminalization of Politics in India

ForumIAS announcing GS Foundation Program for UPSC CSE 2025-26 from 26th June. Click Here for more information.

SC has directed Parliament to pass a law to stop criminalization of politics

What is criminalization of politics?

Criminalization of politics means the rising participation of criminals and people facing criminal charges in politics. The term indicates people with criminal backgrounds becoming politicians and elected representatives.

Extent of criminalization of Indian Politics:

• The Vohra Committee Report in 1993, and the report of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) in 2002 confirmed that there has been a growing trend of persons with extensive criminal backgrounds entering politics.

Data by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) for the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections showed the following:

• 17% of 5,380 candidates contesting the Lok Sabha election 2014, had declared criminal charges in the affidavits submitted to the Election Commission
• 10% had declared serious criminal charges such as murder and rape charges.
• States with the highest percentage of candidates facing criminal cases are Goa (32%), followed by Kerala, Bihar and Jharkhand.
• Proportion of MPs facing criminal charges in 15 th Lok Sabha was 30%, and those facing serious criminal charges was 24%
• Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat and Maharashtra top the list with the highest percentage of MPs accused of criminal and serious criminal offences.

• Criminal backgrounds are not limited to contesting candidates, but are found among winners as well. 13.5% of the winners between 2004 and 2013 had criminal charges against them (Law Commission, Feb 2014, 244 th Report)

Causes of criminalization of Politics:

• Vote bank Politics: Money and muscle power of criminals help political parties gain votes. Since, in India electoral politics is more about caste, ethnicity, religion and several other factors, candidates overcome the reputational loss due to criminal charges and come out as victorious in elections.
• Black money in elections: Electoral politics is largely dependent on the money and the funding that it receives. Since candidates with criminal records often possess greater wealth, they ensure greater inflow in money, labour and other advantages that may help a party in successful campaign, and also possess greater ‘winnability’
• Lack of Intra-party democracy: Political parties in India largely lack intra-party democracy and the decisions on candidature are largely taken by the elite leadership of the party. Thus, the politicians with criminal records often escape the scrutiny by local workers and organisation of the party.
• Lack of adequate deterrence: Due to the low levels of convictions of MPs and MLAs, and delays in trials political parties are not deterred from giving tickets to criminals.
• First Past the Post (FPTP) electoral system :
• FPTP electoral system allows a candidate to be declared elected from the constituency on the basis of plurality of votes polled and not on the majority of votes polled.
• Thus, a candidate with as low as 25-30% of valid votes polled may get elected. Criminals do not find difficult to secure the votes because of the use of their money and muscle power.
• Loopholes in the functioning of Election Commission: The Election Commission has prescribed forms for the contestants of elections to disclose their property details, cases pending in courts, convictions etc. while filing their nomination papers. However, these steps have not been stringent enough to break the nexus between crime and politics.
• Civil society in India has failed to check criminalization of politics due to resistance from establishment, prevalent use of money and muscle power and lack of voter awareness
• Lack of ethics and values in Indian politics further accentuates the problem of criminalization. The political parties have been reluctant in checking criminalization for own vested interests.

Consequences of criminalization of politics:

• The presence of people with criminal backgrounds in politics and law-making of the country has negative impacts on the quality of democracy

2.Enormous amounts of illegal money flow into the electoral process due to extensive links with the criminal underworld

• Criminalization of politics also has the consequence of obstructing the process of justice and causing further delays in trials.
• Criminals entering politics further increases corruption in public life and has an adverse negative impact on the state institutions including the bureaucracy, the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.
• Criminalization of politics introduce a culture of violence in the society and sets a bad precedence for the youth to follow.

Legal Framework:

Constitutional Provisions:

• Qualification: Article 84 of the Constitution
• Disqualification : Article 102 states that a person shall be disqualified from being chosen, and from being a member of either House of Parliament if:
• he holds an office of profit,
• if he is of unsound mind and so declared by a competent court,
• if he is an undischarged insolvent,
• if he is not a citizen of India and if he is disqualified by any other law made by Parliament
• Corresponding provisions for members of State Legislative Assemblies are found in Articles 173 and 191.

Representation of People’s Act, 1951:

• Parliament through the RPA has prescribed further qualifications and disqualifications for membership to Parliament or to a Legislative Assembly.
• Section 8 of the Act lists certain offences which, if a person is convicted of any of them, disqualifies him from being elected, or continuing as, a Member of Parliament or Legislative Assembly.
• A candidate to any National or State Assembly elections is required to furnish an affidavit, in the shape of Form 26 appended to the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. Failure to furnish this information, concealment of information or giving of false information is an offence under Section125A of the RPA.  

Important Supreme Court Judgements:

2002 – In in Union of India (UOI) v. Association for Democratic Reforms and Anr, the SC held that that every candidate, contesting an election to the Parliament, State Legislatures or Municipal Corporation, has to declare their criminal records, financial records and educational qualifications along with their nomination paper.

2005- In Ramesh Dalal vs. Union of India, the SC held that a sitting MP or MLA shall also be subject to disqualification from contesting elections if he is convicted and sentenced to not less than 2 years of imprisonment by a court of law.

2013- In Lily Thomas v. Union of India, the SC held that that Section 8(4) of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 is unconstitutional which allows MPs and MLAs who are convicted to continue in office till an appeal against such conviction is disposed of. The court held that MP/MLA convicted for two years or above would be disqualified immediately.

• In 2017, the Central Government informed SC that lawmakers convicted in any criminal case would not stand automatically disqualified. A convicted lawmaker may move the appellate court to get the conviction stayed thus allowing him or her to continue.

2015 : In Krishnamurthy v. Sivakumar&Ors . the SC held that disclosure of criminal antecedents (especially heinous crimes) of a candidateat the time of filing of nomination paper as mandated by law was a categorically imperative.

2018- In Public Interest Foundation & Others Vs Union of India , left the matter of disqualification of politicians carrying criminal charges against them, to the Parliament saying that the court cannot add to the grounds of disqualification. However, it made the following directions:

• While filling the nomination forms, candidates must declare their criminal past and the cases pending against them in bold letters.
• Political parties are also responsible for putting up details of criminal cases filed against their candidates on their websites.
• Candidate and the concerned political party will have to issue a declaration in widely circulated newspapers in the locality and in electronic media about his or her criminal antecedents
• Parliament must legislate on the matter to ensure that candidates with criminal antecedents do not enter public life or become lawmakers

Analysis of the SC Recommendations:

The SC recommendations have been criticised on the following grounds:

• Parliament, regardless of who is in power, has always been reluctant to legislate on the issue.
• Voters do not generally read the websites of political parties.
• The recommendation regarding publicity campaigns about the criminal background of candidates by political parties is counter-intuitive and there is no incentive for political parties to publicise something which will go against them.

Important Recommendations

Law Commission Recommendations:

The Law Commission in its 244th report on Electoral Reforms titled “Electoral disqualifications” had put forward recommendations on de-criminalization of politics. The main recommendations include:

• Expediting trials in relevant courts where a case is led against a sitting MP/MLA and to conduct the trial on a day-to-day basis with an outer limit of completing the trial in one year.
• Retroactive application – from the date the proposed amendments come into effect, all persons with criminal charges (punishable by more than five years) pending on that date are liable to be disqualified subject to certain safeguards.
• The punishment for filing false affidavits under Section 125A be increased to a minimum of two years, and that the alternate clause for ne be removed.
• Conviction under Section 125A should be made a ground for disqualification under Section 8(1) of the RPA, 1951.
• The filing of false affidavits should be made a corrupt practice under Section 123 of the RPA.

Election Commission Recommendations:

The Election Commission in its “Proposed Electoral Reforms” (2016) recommended that:

Persons charged with cognisable offences should be de-barred from contesting in the elections, at the stage when the charges are framed by the competent court provided the offence is punishable by imprisonment of at least 5 years, and the case is led at least 6 months prior to the election in question.

Criticisms: The recommendation has been criticised primarily on two grounds:

• ruling politicians will misuse this against the opposition
• the law of the land assumes everyone to be innocent till proved guilty or convicted.

2nd ARC Recommendations:

The Second Administrative Reforms Commission in its fourth report on Ethics in Governance (2008) made the following recommendations:

• Section 8 of RPA needed to be amended to disqualify all persons facing charges related to grave and heinous offences and corruption, where charges have been framed six months before the election.
• It also supported the proposal of including filing of false affidavits as an electoral offence under Section 31 of Representation of the People Act, 1950.

Way Forward:

• The legal framework needs to be reformed to effectively curb the steady flow of criminals into the political process.
• The issues of the limited deterrence posed by disqualification upon conviction, and the delays in trials of influential persons that result in a subversion of the process of justice needs to be urgently addressed.
• The Election Commission must take adequate measures to break the nexus between the criminals and the politicians. The most important step in this direction would be checking the use of black money in party and election funding.
• Intra-party democracy should be strengthened for better scrutiny and selection of candidates.
• A strong political will is required on the part of government to decriminalize the entire political system by enactment of required legislations and taking adequate measures.
• Politics can only be decriminalized through larger public awareness and public participation in elections, politics and governance. Further, electoral process should be made more inclusive through wider participation from all sections of the society

Type your email…

Search Articles

Latest articles.

• 10 PM UPSC Current Affairs Quiz 2 July, 2024
• 9 PM UPSC Current Affairs Articles 2nd July, 2024
• Celebrating Play and Learning
• UPSC Prelims Marathon 2nd July – Socio – Religious movement in the latter half of 19th Century and early 20th century – 2024
• 10 PM UPSC Current Affairs Quiz 1 July, 2024
• 9 PM UPSC Current Affairs Articles 1st July, 2024
• UPSC Prelims Marathon 1st July – Freedom Struggle under Extremist Phase (1905-1917) and India and Neighborhood policy – 2024
• 10 PM Daily UPSC Current Affairs 30th June – 2024 | Revision Test
• [Answered] UPSC Mains Answer Writing 29th June 2024 I Mains Marathon
• UPSC Prelims Marathon 30th June – Revision – 2024

Prelims 2024 Current Affairs

• Art and Culture
• Indian Economy
• Science and Technology
• Environment  & Ecology
• International Relations
• Polity &  Nation
• Important Bills and Acts
• International Organizations
• Index, Reports and Summits
• Government Schemes and Programs
• Miscellaneous
• Species in news

All India Open Test(Simulator X)

• Law of torts – Complete Reading Material
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – September 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 2 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 3 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 5 October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 2 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 3 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 – December 2019
• Sign in / Join

• political systems

All you need to know about criminalization of politics

This article is written by Surbhi Jindal , a law student at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar National Law University, Haryana. Through this article, she has discussed the concept of criminalization of politics in the Indian context exhaustively.

It has been published by Rachit Garg.

Table of Contents

Introduction 

India gained independence from British Rule in 1947, but a question to ponder over: Is India still an independent nation? It is still being governed by the people who are holding criminal charges against them. Do you think that the country of India will progress in such a way? 

India is a democratic country, with a parliamentary system of democracy, which means that the country is governed by elected representatives. It has many political parties and elections are held every five years. The scope and interest in joining politics are increasing day by day but with this, the percentage of criminal participation has also increased. 

Even the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, from time to time, has expressed its anguish over the matter of increasing criminalization of politics in the Indian scenario. 

Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman stated that the Supreme Court is bound by the constitutional principle and doctrine of separation of powers. Hence, it cannot make laws and regulations on this matter. Parliament can make laws, but the question arises when India’s Parliament will take steps to clean up Indian politics? Will it ever take action?

The objective of this article is to analyze the causes and impact of the criminalization of politics in India exhaustively. Furthermore, it also discusses how we can take steps to cleanse our Indian politics to make India a better nation.

Let us understand the issue of criminalization of politics that is growing day by day in India. But before we move forward, let us see why many criminals are interested in joining politics in India? What is the reason behind it?

Why are criminals joining politics in India

Criminals are joining politics in India for a variety of reasons. The first reason is that crime pays. Getting into the legitimate sphere of politics is a way to legitimize one’s gains from crime and power their finances further.

The second reason is the lack of opportunities in other fields. In some cases, criminals have been pushed out of their traditional fields due to economic liberalisation and changing labour markets, and so they see politics as an opportunity to make a living without breaking any laws.

The third reason why criminals join politics is that they tend to be more highly motivated than other politicians and thus more likely to deliver on electoral promises, such as providing employment or development projects which can improve people’s lives.

Defining the concept of criminalization of politics

Criminalization is defined as an act when an activity is turned from being legal to illegal. It is the making of actions committed by individuals illegal by any judicial decision or law, and turning the individuals committing those acts into criminals. Criminalization of politics is defined as the situation when criminals participate in the politics of the government, i.e., contest elections and get elected to the Parliament and state legislatures.

This growing menace has impacted our society so rapidly that principle concepts of democracy like the rule of law, fundamental rights, free and fair elections, accountability, and credibility have turned into a just dream and lost their credibility in the real world.

India is one of the world’s largest democratic countries. Elections should be conducted in a free and fair manner, and they must attract the country’s best talent.

The idea of democracy is always based on the will of the people. The intention of the people must always conform to the rule of law. But the choice of people has been undermined by the existence of money and muscle power, which largely affects politics.

Criminals should have no place in the sacred electoral process and therefore, it is important to curb this criminalization in politics.

Statistical analysis of criminalization of politics

The menace of criminalization of politics is gradually degrading the spirit of our Indian democracy. India claims to be the world’s largest democracy, but it cannot be called a democracy of ideal representatives.

Abraham Lincoln, in his Gettysburg address on November 19, 1863, defined democracy. He said, “Democracy is the government of the people, by the people and for the people.” But now, democracy is only seen in the books. In such a situation, how can the welfare of society prevail?

As per the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), the chances of winning by people facing criminal charges are more than for innocent and clean-handed people. ADR is an organization that has been working continuously to bring electoral and political reforms since 1999. Let us look at the statistical data of the past three elections.

As per the above data, during every election, a consistent increase in criminals participating in the elections process can be seen. In the year 2009, 30% of MPs in Lok Sabha were against criminal charges. In 2014, 34% of MPs in the Lok Sabha faced criminal charges. The percentage was extremely high in the last Lok Sabha elections. 43% of the members in Lok Sabha were facing criminal charges and 29 % had charges of committing serious crimes.

Such a bad condition of a democratic country disheartens. People vote out of fear. Goondas and Mafias are forcing them to give votes to a particular party. Political parties in order to fulfill their political agendas give them some promises in the form of benefits which are forgotten as soon as the election process is over. Goondas and Mafias have always been a part of the electoral process since the birth of Indian democracy.

The recent report on ‘Analysis of Criminal, Financial, and Other background details of Union Council of Ministers, Post Cabinet Expansion on July 7, 2021″ by National Election Watch (NEW) and Association for democratic reforms (ADR) analyses the latest affidavits by 78 ministers including Hon’ble Prime Minister from 2019 Lok Sabha, present Rajya Sabha, and Assembly elections. The criminal background in the recent cabinet is summarized here as follows:

• Out of 78 ministers, 33 (42%) ministers have declared criminal cases against them.
• 24 (31%) ministers have reported serious criminal cases against them, such as rape, murder, robbery, etc.
• Four ministers have cases against them related to Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 .
• Five ministers have cases against them related to promoting communal disharmony.
• Five ministers have declared cases of electoral violations against them.

Furthermore, ADR also stated in his report that the proportion of Union ministers who have declared criminal cases against them has risen by 3%.

Causes of criminalization of politics

Muscle power .

The scenario is changing today more often. Now, the criminals are taking the reins of power into their hands. During elections, it is seen that politicians deliver eloquent speeches expressing their hatred towards crime and promising to eliminate corruption in the country. They lay stress on eliminating the use of muscle power in politics. But this is hardly implemented.

Imagine that the person himself charged with a crime is giving himself a long and beautiful speech at elections for eliminating crime in an area. How ironic is it? First Past the Post system, also known as the simple majority system, works on the principle that a maximum number of votes implies winning a candidate.

An ideology that works behind adopting the method of muscle power is that if one party cannot secure faith in society, then fear and violence may aid them in the same. When there is a nexus between political parties and criminals, the most dangerous elements in society take birth.

Money power

Besides muscle power, black money and funds from the mafia are also significant causes of criminalization in politics. In this context, K.C. Suri believes that since ancient times, the use of money and muscle power by political elites to win elections has been completely wrong. “Large individual politicians, not just political elite, are having a nexus with criminals and this has further channelized social fissure as one of the formidable factors to get through elections.”  

Money accumulated through unlawful acts also acts as one of the primary reasons for increasing criminalization in politics. This amount of money becomes an easy way to buy voters and win elections. The political parties easily buy the majority of voters. It will also provide a breeding ground for another menace called uncontrolled corruption. 

Corruption is also one of the major causes of the criminalization of politics. The majority of candidates contesting elections require money, funds, and donations. It is pertinent to note that corruption directly gives rise to contempt of the law. There is a direct relationship between contempt of law, criminalization of politics, and sin. When contempt of law combines with the criminalization of politics, it gives birth to flourishing corruption.

Growing corruption ultimately leads to the criminalization of politics. Corruption has crept into almost every corner of the Indian political system.

Divisions in the Indian political system

The Indian political system is based on divisions in which our Indian society exists. Criminals take advantage of this division and enter the arena of politics. They smartly portray them as the protector of the respective class, caste, religion, and community. In general, while choosing a candidate, hardly the criminal background of a candidate is scrutinized. People tend to vote based on the candidates’ caste, ethnicity, religion, community, and linguistic lineage.

No retirement policy in Indian politics

The other major problem lies in the retirement policy in Indian politics. There is no retirement policy for Lok Sabha members, and hence some members never retire. The issue of family fiefdom seriously jeopardizes the careers of budding politicians and lawyers. The slow working and high rate of pending cases further aggravate the problem of the criminalization of politics.

Impact of criminalization of politics

When lawbreakers get elected as lawmakers, it seems impossible for a country to head towards the path of progress. The working efficiency of Parliament while making laws is reduced, and the effectiveness of administration gets hampered. As a result, the general public loses credibility in the functioning of Parliament.

Patronage by politicians and the adjournment culture further aid in preventing speedy trials against criminals. Corruption levels increase, and it weakens state institutions such as the legislature, bureaucracy, and judiciary. It sets a bad example against the youth and gives support to the violence prevailing in society.

Political standards are continuously going down. The reason is the criminalization of politics in Indian democracy. Politics has lost its earlier identity of members serving society selflessly. It more often presently attracts persons with criminal backgrounds having own- pursuit interests.

It is the country that has to suffer. There has been enough stress laid on the shoulders of lawmakers to come up with the amendments in law but to date, the situation remains the same. 

Role of judiciary in controlling criminalization of politics

From time to time, the Honorable Supreme Court has taken steps to curb India’s increasing criminalization of politics. Various judgments, views, and decisions have been put forward in this regard. But despite this, nothing significant has happened. The Apex Court rightly pointed out in its statement and most of us would indefinitely agree to the statement:

“No one can deny that the menace of criminalization in the Indian political system is growing day by day. Also, no one can deny that for maintaining the purity of the political system, persons with criminal antecedents and who are involved in the criminalization of the political system should not be permitted to be lawmakers.”

In August 2021, the bench of Justices Rohinton Fali Nariman and B.R. Gavai from the Hon’ble Supreme Court expressed their anguish over the criminalization of politics. The Hon’ble Court observed the following:

“The political parties refuse to wake up from deep slumber. Cleansing the polluted stream of politics is obviously not one of the immediate pressing concerns of the legislative branch of government.”

The Supreme Court ordered the political parties in its February 2020 contempt petition to comply with its judgment of Public Interest Foundation and Ors. vs. Union of India and Anr. (2018) . However, the orders of the decision were not followed by the various political parties. The court observed that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the Janata Dal (United), the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), and the Congress were guilty of contempt because they did not comply with the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It imposed a fine of 1 lakh for not disclosing the complete details of criminal antecedents of candidates in the Bihar elections in 2020. Apart from this, the Communist Party of India and the National Congress Party were asked to deposit five lakhs each because they did not comply with the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court at all.

The present August 2021 contempt petition was filed by Advocate Brajesh Singh, who alleged that the various political parties did not obey the court’s orders during the Bihar assembly elections in 2020. After taking the contentions and arguments put forward, the Bench noted that most political parties have either not given full disclosure or have not followed the format it was to be delivered.

In its latest judgment, the following were the orders and amendments made by the bench in its previous ruling in the year 2020:

• ECI has been directed to create a mobile application that contains all the information about the criminal antecedents of the candidates so that the general public can have access to information conveniently.
• ECI has been directed to create a separate monitoring cell for checking whether the parties are complying with the court’s order or not. It has also referred them to bring such instances of the breach to the knowledge of the court. 
• The Hon’ble Supreme Court directed the political parties to set up a new tab on their homepage of websites named ‘candidates with criminal antecedents’ to make it easier for voters to know more information. 
• The court has modified its earlier order of February 2020, directing parties to publish details within 48 hours of selection and not two weeks before nomination.
• It also observed that a unique bench at the Supreme Court might be formed to monitor the cases involving accused MPs and MLAs.  

Further, the issue was taken into cognizance mainly of two separate cases of criminalization in Indian politics. 

• Cases against the politicians: The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the state governments could not withdraw the cases against legislators without the permission of respective state high courts.
• Parties punished: Nine parties were held guilty of contempt for not disclosing complete details in Bihar 2020 elections. Further, eight of them were also fined with heavy penalties.

In 1997 , high courts were directed by the Honorable Supreme Court not to suspend the conviction if that person is found convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 .

In the case of Ramesh Dalal vs. Union of India (2005 ), the Hon’ble Supreme Court pronounced that a sitting member of Parliament and a member of the state legislature can also be disqualified from contesting elections if he is convicted for not less than two years for imprisonment by the court of law.

Furthermore, it was observed in K Prabhakaran vs. P Jayarajan (2005) that, “those who break the law should not make the law. Generally speaking, the purpose sought to be achieved by enacting disqualification on conviction for certain offences is to prevent persons with criminal backgrounds from entering politics and the house – a powerful wing of governance. Persons with a criminal background do pollute the process of election as they do not have many holds barred and have no reservation from indulging in criminality to win success at an election” .

Public Interest Litigation(PIL) was filed in the Supreme Court in 2011 , seeking to issue guidelines and lay framework to be followed to curb the menace of criminalization of politics and debar those charged with a crime from contesting elections.

Section 8(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 provided a respite to a member of Parliament or a member of the legislative assembly/legislative council. If the convicted member filed an appeal within three months, then that application was accepted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. This implied that the member could continue his membership of the concerned legislature until the court disposed of the application. The court struck down this provision in the case of Lily Thomas vs. Union of India (2013) . At present, a member of Parliament or member of state legislature stands disqualified if they are convicted of an offence provided in Section 8(1) or 8(2) of the Representation of People Act, 1951. Also, a person remains disqualified from holding a seat after six years of release. Section 8(4) was held unconstitutional since Parliament’s work is to make disqualification laws and not secure the seats for membership.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court held in People’s Union for Civil Liberties vs. Union of India (2018) that the voter has the fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution to know about the candidates who are contesting the election.

In the year 2020, the Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated its 2018 order. The main aim is to discourage candidates with criminal backgrounds from contesting elections. Political parties should explain why they have chosen a candidate with a criminal background. The candidate selection must be based on merit, not on winnability, the Supreme Court observed. The information must be published on social media platforms, local and national newspapers, and the website. The same information needs to be submitted to the election commission within 72 hours after declaring the candidate’s name. A compliance report must be filed with the Election Commission or should be ready to face contempt action. It is an undeniable fact that electoral and judicial reforms are the need of the hour.

The way forward

It is an undeniable fact that criminals should not be allowed to contest elections at any cost. They pollute the true spirit of democracy. But what if the person has only been accused? Should it only be based on an accusation, be barred from contesting elections? The answer is no. Our criminal justice system works on the legal principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’. Every innocent man has the right to contest elections. Then what is the way ahead?

In 2017, the Supreme Court ordered special fast-track courts for such matters. The ultimate advantage would be that since the cases will be decided at the earliest and hence, it could be clear whether that person can contest elections or not.

There is also a need for amendment in the Representation of People Act, 1951. Section 7 to 11 of this Act discusses a person who can contest elections. The provisions need to be revisited to pass the test of time and changed social circumstances.

Committees such as the Vohra Committee and Dinesh Goswami Committee have also given various recommendations. These recommendations must be taken into account as soon as possible. Electoral reforms and judicial reforms are the need of the hour. But it is important to note that it is not only the state’s duty but also of citizens to contribute to maintaining the true spirit of democracy.

Through the above facts and analysis, it can be observed that the corrupt practices of political parties have steadily increased. Various methods have been employed by the political parties to win elections. From time to time, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, Election Commission of India, and Parliament have taken steps to curb this menace, but nothing substantial has been achieved so far.

Stringent laws should be passed, and assistance should be given to constitutional institutions such as the Election Commission of India. It should be given the power to audit the financial accounts of political parties. The other way is to bring the financing of political parties under the ambit of Right to Information (RTI). The problem is a lack of political will, which needs to be addressed by politicians at the earliest. Deeper systematic reforms are required at the earliest.

Our judiciary is indeed taking steps and trying its best to cope with the increasing criminalization of politics. But now, the onus shifts on the Parliament since it has been granted powers under our Constitution to adjudicate on the law-making powers. It’s time for India to become truly an independent and progressive nation.

• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/readersblog/hail-to-feminism/criminalisation-of-politics-24324
• https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/criminality-in-the-indian-political-system/article5372634.ece
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/nation-losing-patience-sc-on-criminalisation-of-politics-101628620583327.html
• https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/criminalisation-of-politics-must-be-curbed-7451116/

Students of  Lawsikho courses  regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on  Instagram  and subscribe to our  YouTube  channel for more amazing legal content.

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

Causes of crime, the issue of language in central and state legal and political systems in india, criminal cases against lawmakers : efforts by the supreme court in decriminalising politics, leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

3-Day Bootcamp (LIVE only) on

How you can use labour law skills to go from HR manager to business leader

Register now

Thank you for registering with us, you made the right choice.

Congratulations! You have successfully registered for the webinar. See you there.

Criminalization of Politics in India for UPSC

What is the meaning of Criminalization of Politics ?

It means, the anti social elements entering the electoral contest and getting elected to legislature. It takes place primarily because of nexus that exists between criminals and certain politicians in which politicians extend protection to criminal activities of antisocial elements and the criminals extend money and muscle power to the politicians to win election.

In order to increase their chances of getting their candidates elected to legislature, the political parties nominate criminals to contest election leading to criminalisation of politics.

Why Criminalization of Politics still continues ?

1. The criminal justice system has inbuilt delays which are exploited by the criminals. By going on appeal to high court against a conviction in a trial court where the high court suspends his conviction and suspension both. The convicted person becomes innocent in the eye of law and he is allowed to contest election.

2. The rate of conviction in India has been going down which means many persons who are accused of crime may actually go unpunished in a court of law and they cannot be disqualified from contesting elections.

3. The first-past-the-post electoral system which is followed in the Lok Sabha and Legislative Assembly elections which is based on the basis of getting largest number of valid votes polled in the election. This allows the candidate to get elected into the legislature mearly polling 25 to 30% of the valid votes which a criminal funds to obtain by using his money and muscle power. Thus first-past-the-post does not discourage the criminal from contesting the election.

4. The parliament has failed to enact adequate electoral reforms to decriminalize politics.

What are the impact of Criminalization of Politics ?

1. The worst consequence is that law breakers get elected as law maker. The legislature loose their moral authority to enact laws and they also loose credibility and effectiveness in enacting necessary laws on time for effective administration of the country.

2. Criminalisation of Politics, which relies heavily on money and muscle power also leads to circulation of large amount of black money during and after elections diluting the probity in public. Further it also introduced in the culture of violence in the society and sets a bad precedence for the youth to follow.

3. The state institution like judiciary, executive, legislators, bureaucracy, etc become weak and the administration of the country suffers.

How to stop Criminalization of Politics in India ?

What are the measures undertaken to curb Criminalization of Politics ?

There are mainly two types of measures that have been taken, namely Judicial Measures and Election Commission’s of India Measures.

[ A ] Judicial Measures

1. The Supreme Court in the Union of India Vs Association of Democratic Reforms 2002 held that citizen under Article 19 ( 1 ) ( a ) enjoyed the right to make informed choices. Therefore it declared election commission to get all contesting candidates to declare at the time of filling their nomination – the asset and liability, educational qualification, criminal activities and pending criminal cases if any in a court of law. This is to bring transparency in the electoral system.

2. In Ramesh Dalal 2005 case, the Supreme Court held that even the member of state legislature shall be disqualified from contesting election if on the day of filling his nomination papers he stands convicted and sentenced to not less than 2 years of imprisonment.

3. In 1997, the Supreme Court directed all the High Courts not to suspend the person on appeal if he is convicted and sentenced by a trial court under Prevention of Corruption Act 1988.

4. In Lily Thomas Vs Union Of India 2013 case, the Supreme Court stated that section 8 ( 4 ) of Representation of People Act , which provided that disqualification of MLA shall take effect after 90 days after his conviction as unconstitutional and void on the ground that Article 102 ( 1 ) and Article 191 ( 1 )  provide for disqualification and the MPs and MLAs where such disqualification for being member of House is automatic and with immediate effect.

5. In PUCL Vs Union of India 2013 case, the Supreme Court held that citizens under article 19 ( 1 ) ( a ) enjoyed the right to negative vote and directed election commission to include NOTA option for voters to reject all the contesting candidates.

6. In PIF Vs Union of India 2014 case, the Supreme Court directed all the trial courts to complete a trial of a case within one year after framing criminal charges if the trial is against the member of a legislature.

[ B ] Election Commission of India’s Measures : – 

1. In August 1997, the election commission directed all the returning officer to reject the nomination papers of any candidate if on the day of filling the nomination paper, he stands convicted in a court of law even if his sentence is suspended by a court.

2. The Election Commission has made following recommendation to be passed into law by the Parliament : –

a ) If a person is accused of a serious crime and if a court has prima facie has framed criminal charges against him he shall be disqualified from contesting elections. However, in order to prevent the ruling party from misusing the provision it shall be provided that only those cases that are filled 6 months before the holding of the election lead to disqualification.

The Law Commission of India and National Commission to review the working of Constitution have made similar recommendations but only if the cases are filed atleast 1 year before the holding of election.

b ) If a person is found guilty of a crime by a commission of enquiry he shall also be disqualified from contesting elections.

c ) The two ballot electorate system shall be introduced in place of first-past-the-post electoral system for holding election of Lok Sabha and Legislative Assembly. For this system a candidate is declared elected from a constituency only if he obtains more than 50% of valid votes polled. In a multi cornered contest if no candidate obtains the majority of votes then the 2 candidates who obtains the largest number of votes shall be allowed to contest in 2nd round of election where one of them must be able to get elected. This will discourage the criminals from contesting elections.

This electoral system is followed in the Presidential and Parliamentary election in France and Parliamentary elections in Russia.

d ) Along with 2 ballot system the right to reject should be introduced in favour of voters. Under this system an elector can reject all the candidates and such a ballot shall not be regarded as invalid. It will continue to be valid votes. This will further make task of criminal difficult to get elected.

e ) At present section 125 ( 1 ) of Representation of Peoples Act 1951, prescribes a maximum punishment of 6 months for filling false information at the time of contesting election. The Election Commission wants this sentence to be increased to atleast 2 years so that a person can not only be disqualified from being the members of the House, if elected but also disqualified from contesting election.

You may also like

Features and Importance of Preamble of Indian...

About the author.

UPSCOPTIONAL

• भाषा : हिंदी
• Classroom Courses
• Our Selections
• Student Login
• About NEXT IAS
• Director’s Desk
• Advisory Panel
• Faculty Panel
• General Studies Courses
• Optional Courses
• Interview Guidance Program
• Postal Courses
• Test Series
• Current Affairs
• Student Portal

Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) raised concerns as the criminalisation in politics is growing day by day.

Supreme Court’s Statement

• The SC found nine political parties guilty of contempt for not following in letter and spirit its February 13, 2020 direction to publish details of criminal cases against candidates fielded in Lok Sabha and Assembly polls.
• The SC appeals to lawmakers to come up with necessary legal provisions to fight this “ have fallen on deaf ears ”. 
• It required political parties to publish details of criminal cases against its candidates on their websites besides a local vernacular newspaper and a national newspaper and social media accounts within 48 hours of candidate selection or not less than two weeks before the first date for filing of nominations, whichever is earlier. 
• In its recent order , the court modified this and said the details “shall be published within 48 hours of the selection of the candidate” as the latter is difficult to follow given statutory provisions.

Criminalisation of Politics

• Began in the late 1970s.
• There was no law to bar criminal candidates.
• Alarming in the criminalisation of politics has increased in the last 4 general elections.
• Unholy nexus between the politicians and bureaucracy: This undesirable and dangerous relationship between bureaucracy and political leaders opened the doors of criminalization of politics. 
• Caste and religion: Both are responsible for the criminalization of politics. In bureaucracy there are certain procedures and rules for the promotion. But caste and religion both interfere in this process. In many states less qualified civil servants get promotion. 
• Quota System: The quota system is also fully responsible for this. And it is also found that a minister of a particular caste or religion will distribute favour to the members of his own caste and religion. It is found in many states of India.
• Party government: The system of party government is also responsible for the criminalization of politics. On the eve of the general election the leaders of the party give promises to the electorate. But when the political party comes to power then they will do nothing for the members who makes the political party wins, the funds which is given by the government for the public welfare and complete their need and wants but political party use that funds or money for their own purpose and this is also comes in criminalization of politics.
• If in any case the candidate has been accused of an offence that is punishable with two or more imprisonment, in any pending case in which the charges have been framed by the court.
• S ection 8, Representation of the People Act, 1951 , (The R.P. Act, 1951): It pertains to the cases where a conviction for an offence is involved other than an offence that has been mentioned under and sentenced with imprisonment for one year or more.
• Vote Bank: The political parties and individuals have astronomical expenditure for vote buying and other illegitimate purposes through which these people are so called goondas. A politician’s link with the constituency provides the congenial climate to political crime.
• Lack of Political will: It remains the most persistent problem. Till date most efforts to reform the electoral system have been taken by EC and the SC only. It is parliament’s responsibility to amend the Representation of People Act 1951, deals with disqualification of candidates against whom charges have been proved in court for serious offences.
• Muscle Power and Vote bank: Use of muscle power by politicians to collect votes in their favor.
• Corruption: Use of money and other freebies in form of cash and kind both affect the final results of the election to a large extent.
• Model Code of Conduct: Its blatant violation is seen in almost all elections.
• Awareness Amongst Voters: Making voters aware of candidates with criminal antecedents has its limitations.
• Lack of Governance: The SC’s orders or other legal mechanisms are not fully followed thereby creating an anarchic environment in the country. Law breakers end up becoming law makers.
• Polarisation Towards Caste/Religions: People still go by their caste system, not considering the actual background, that matters, of the candidate.

Recommendations made by the Election Commission of India in its report on the Proposed Election Reforms, 2004

• Section 125A of the R.P.A: The Act should be amended, in order to provide more stringent punishment for concealing or providing wrong information in Form 26 under the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 to a minimum term of two years imprisonment and the alternative punishment of assessing a fine upon the candidate should be removed. 
• Amend Form 26: It was also recommended to amend Form 26 to include all items of the additional affidavit, that was prescribed by the Election Commission as well as to add a column where the candidates should disclose their annual income for the purpose of tax including their profession.
• Amend RPA,1951: The most important recommendation was to make an amendment in The R.P. Act, 1951, to insert a new section that should make a declaration of assets and the criminal cases that are pending against the candidate, this should be made necessary as part of the qualification for membership to the House of the People.
• Expand the scope of RPA, 1951: In order to deter the politicians from having a criminal background and the ones who have committed heinous crimes. In case a candidate has charges framed against him under Section 8 with regards to offences and otherwise, he should be disqualified for a duration of six years. 

Way Forward

• Only court order can not mend criminalisation in politics, political will is required.
• To modify the existing laws legal changes should be made and to prevent the criminals from contesting in elections. The criminals should be blacklisted and disciplinary actions must be taken against them.
• Follow within 48 hour rule: The details of the candidate “shall be published within 48 hours of the selection of the candidate”
• The court also directed political parties to have a caption “candidates with criminal antecedents candidates” on their homepages. 
• It asked ECI to create a dedicated mobile application containing information published by candidates regarding their criminal antecedents so that voters can get all the information in one stroke and to carry awareness campaigns for voters.
• Political Will: Corruption and criminalization of politics is hitting at the roots of democracy. However, mere disqualification for a certain period of time cannot be the final cure under any circumstance. Therefore, Parliament must take steps urgently to curb this menace. 
• Transparency in funding: Greater transparency should be brought in campaign financing that will make it less desirable for the political parties to comprise the candidates pertaining to criminal background.
• Penalty on political parties also: The penalty should be inflicted on the political parties who give tickets to the criminals to contest in elections.
• ECI should be given power to audit party accounts:  The Election Commission of India (ECI) should be given the power of auditing the financial accounts of the political parties or the finance of the political parties must be brought to the Right to Information (RTI) law.
• Better governance for awareness: Broader governance should be improved for voters in order to make them aware if there is any criminal background of the candidate. 
• Break the nexus: Adequate measures must be taken by the Election Commission in order to break the link between the criminals and politicians.
• Derecognizing Parties: In order to set aside the lacunae, it is only possible if the de-criminalisation of politics takes place. Candidates should be disqualified if they violate this provision and the political parties who with the knowledge of their antecedents should be derecognized and deregistered. 
• Permanent Debarment: Many committees made an important submission that any person who is convicted for heinous crimes such as murder, rape, dacoity, smuggling, etc. should be disbarred permanently from contesting in the elections.
• There is an inherent need to supersede the existing judicial hierarchy and establish fast-track courts to accomplish this purpose. This encompasses a quick trial within six months from the time charges are framed so as to determine whether or not a candidate is qualified to hold office and applies to the post vide public elections.
• The crime that the candidate is accused of;
• How many cases and what kind of cases are charged against the candidate?;
• Details of the case, case number and name of Court;
• At which stage the criminal case has reached – FIR or investigation or charge-sheet or trial;
• Why can’t the other individuals without any criminal antecedents be selected as candidates?
• The Vohra Committees Report Analysis on “Criminalisation of Politics” should be given more attention.

Source : IE

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

Daily current affairs 02-07-2024, daily current affairs 01-07-2024, daily current affairs 29-06-2024, india’s demographic dividend: potential and challenges.

Next Generation Institute for UPSC Civil Services Examination Preparation.

• Video Gallery
• Privacy Policy
• Terms and Conditions
• UPSC CSE Posts
• Testimonials

NEXT IAS (Delhi)

Old rajinder nagar.

• 27-B, Pusa Road, Metro Pillar no.118, Near Karol Bagh Metro, New Delhi-110060

Mukherjee Nagar

• 1422, Main Mukherjee Nagar Road. Near Batra Cinema New Delhi-110009

NEXT IAS (Jaipur)

• NEXT IAS - Plot No - 6 & 7, 3rd Floor, Sree Gopal Nagar, Gopalpura Bypass, Above Zudio Showroom Jaipur (Rajasthan) - 302015

NEXT IAS (Prayagraj)

• 31/31, Sardar Patel Marg, Civil Lines, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh - 211001

NEXT IAS (Bhopal)

• Plot No. 46 Zone - 2 M.P Nagar Bhopal - 462011
• 8827664612 ,

• Classroom Programme
• Interview Guidance
• Online Programme
• Drishti Store
• My Bookmarks
• My Progress
• Change Password
• From The Editor's Desk
• How To Use The New Website
• Help Centre

Achievers Corner

• Topper's Interview
• About Civil Services
• UPSC Prelims Syllabus
• GS Prelims Strategy
• Prelims Analysis
• GS Paper-I (Year Wise)
• GS Paper-I (Subject Wise)
• CSAT Strategy
• Previous Years Papers
• Practice Quiz
• Weekly Revision MCQs
• 60 Steps To Prelims
• Prelims Refresher Programme 2020

Mains & Interview

• Mains GS Syllabus
• Mains GS Strategy
• Mains Answer Writing Practice
• Essay Strategy
• Fodder For Essay
• Model Essays
• Drishti Essay Competition
• Ethics Strategy
• Ethics Case Studies
• Ethics Discussion
• Ethics Previous Years Q&As
• Papers By Years
• Papers By Subject
• Be MAINS Ready
• Awake Mains Examination 2020
• Interview Strategy
• Interview Guidance Programme

Current Affairs

• Daily News & Editorial
• Daily CA MCQs
• Sansad TV Discussions
• Monthly CA Consolidation
• Monthly Editorial Consolidation
• Monthly MCQ Consolidation

Drishti Specials

• To The Point
• Important Institutions
• Learning Through Maps
• PRS Capsule
• Summary Of Reports
• Gist Of Economic Survey

Study Material

• NCERT Books
• NIOS Study Material
• IGNOU Study Material
• Yojana & Kurukshetra
• Chhatisgarh
• Uttar Pradesh
• Madhya Pradesh

Test Series

• UPSC Prelims Test Series
• UPSC Mains Test Series
• UPPCS Prelims Test Series
• UPPCS Mains Test Series
• BPSC Prelims Test Series
• RAS/RTS Prelims Test Series
• Daily Editorial Analysis
• YouTube PDF Downloads
• Strategy By Toppers
• Ethics - Definition & Concepts
• Mastering Mains Answer Writing
• Places in News
• UPSC Mock Interview
• PCS Mock Interview
• Interview Insights
• Prelims 2019
• Product Promos
• Daily Updates

Make Your Note

Supreme Court on Criminalisation of Politics

• 11 Aug 2021
• GS Paper - 2
• Representation of People's Act
• Judgements & Cases

Why in News

Recently, the Supreme Court in the two different judgements has raised concerns about the menace of criminalisation in politics.

• In one case, it found nine political parties guilty of contempt for not following in letter and spirit its February 13, 2020 direction.
• In another case, it has issued directions that no criminal case against MPs or MLAs can be withdrawn without an approval of the high court of the concerned state.

• The February 2020 order required political parties to publish details of criminal cases against its candidates on their websites, a local vernacular newspaper, national newspaper and social media accounts.
• This is to be done within 48 hours of candidate selection or not less than two weeks before the first date for filing of nominations, whichever is earlier.
• The court took a lenient view of the matter, as it was the first elections (Bihar assembly Elections 2020) conducted after issuance of its directions.
• Directed political parties to have a caption “candidates with criminal antecedents candidates” on their homepages.
• It asked Election Commission of India (ECI) to create a dedicated mobile application containing information published by candidates regarding their criminal antecedents.
• The court appealed to the conscience of the lawmakers to come up with a law tackling the criminalization of politics.
• The Bench was hearing a pending PIL (Public Interest Litigation) seeking establishment of fast-track courts for cases against legislators.
• In November 2017, the Supreme Court had ordered setting-up of Special Courts in each state to try the pending cases.
• Accordingly, 12 such courts were set up across the country.
• Examine the withdrawals, whether pending or disposed of since last year.
• High court Chief Justices to constitute Special Benches to monitor the progress of criminal cases against sitting and former legislators.
• Judicial officers presiding over Special Courts or CBI Courts involving prosecution of MPs or MLAs shall not be transferred until further orders.
• Asked all the high courts to furnish details of posting of judges and the number of pending and disposed cases before them.
• It was a move that significantly clips the powers of the state governments at a time when the top court has expressed grave concern over the criminalisation of politics.
• Several states have withdrawn cases against legislators, under this section.

Criminalisation of Politics

• It means the participation of criminals in politics which includes that criminals can contest in the elections and get elected as members of the Parliament and the State legislature.
• It takes place primarily due to the nexus between politicians and criminals.
• In spite of taking appropriate measures to amend the Representation of the People Act, 1951 there has been an unsaid understanding among the political parties which deters Parliament to make strong law curbing criminalisation of politics.
• Several laws and court judgments have not helped much, due to the lack of enforcement of laws and judgments.
• Publishing of the entire criminal history of candidates fielded by political parties may not be very effective, as a major chunk of voters tend to vote through a narrow prism of community interests like caste or religion.
• Candidates with serious records seem to do well despite their public image, largely due to their ability to finance their own elections and bring substantive resources to their respective parties.
• Also, sometimes voters are left with no options, as all competing candidates have criminal records.
• It limits the choice of voters to elect a suitable candidate.
• It is against the ethos of free and fair election which is the bedrock of a democracy.
• The major problem is that the law-breakers become law-makers, this affects the efficacy of the democratic process in delivering good governance.
• These unhealthy tendencies in the democratic system reflect a poor image of the nature of India’s state institutions and the quality of its elected representatives.
• It also leads to increased circulation of black money during and after elections, which in turn increases corruption in society and affects the working of public servants.
• It introduces a culture of violence in society and sets a bad precedent for the youth to follow and reduces people's faith in democracy as a system of governance.

Landmark Decisions in Decriminalising Politics

• In 2002, the Supreme Court, in Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) v. Union of India , mandated the disclosure of information relating to criminal antecedents, educational qualification, and personal assets of a candidate contesting elections.
• The Supreme Court in Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013) case, struck down as unconstitutional Section 8(4) of the Representation of the People Act that allowed convicted lawmakers a three-month period for filing appeal to the higher court and to get a stay on the conviction and sentence.
• In People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (2013) , the SC recognised negative voting as a constitutional right of a voter and directed the Government to provide the ‘NOTA’ option in electronic voting machines.
• In Public Interest Foundation and Ors. v Union of India (2014) based on recommendations made by the Law Commission in its 244 th report, the SC had ordered that trials, in relation to sitting MPs and MLAs be concluded within a year of charges against them being framed.
• The Supreme Court’s decision on information disclosure (Lok Prahari v. Union of India, 2018) paves a way for future constitutional interventions in India’s political party funding regime, including the scheme of electoral bonds.

Way Forward

• The nature of the government machinery needs to change to make it more transparent, accountable and pervade.
• Awareness among people (voters) about their rights and they should vote for the right person should be created.
• Given the reluctance by the political parties to curb criminalisation of politics and its growing detrimental effects on Indian democracy, Indian courts must now seriously consider banning people accused with serious criminal charges from contesting elections.

Criminalization of Politics, Meaning, Causes, Effects and Consequences

Criminalization of Politics implies the increasing involvement of criminals and individuals with criminal charges in Indian politics. Criminalization of Politics for UPSC Exam.

Table of Contents

Criminalization of Politics

Criminalization of Politics is an important topic for UPSC exams, especially in the context of Indian politics. Here are some key points that you can include in your UPSC notes regarding the criminalization of politics. Criminalization of politics refers to the increasing involvement of individuals with criminal backgrounds or charges in the political process, including running for political office or holding positions of power within political parties.

The Criminalization of Politics is an important part of Indian Polity which is an important subject in UPSC Syllabus . Students can also go for UPSC Mock Test to get more accuracy in their preparations.

Criminalization of Politics Meaning

Politics in India is becoming more and more criminalized, which suggests a rise in the number of criminals and those facing criminal accusations. Additionally, this phrase refers to those with criminal histories who go on to become elected officials and delegates.

A person who has served a sentence of more than two years in prison is also ineligible to run for office until six years have passed since their release, according to Section 8 of the Indian Representative of People Act. However, this clause is ineffective in real life because of the ongoing criminalization of politics in India.

Criminalization of Politics Causes

Several laws and court rulings haven’t really helped because they aren’t being enforced.  The disclosure of a candidate’s whole criminal background by a political party may not be very successful because many voters choose to cast their ballots based only on caste or religious considerations. In large part because of their capacity to finance their own elections and contribute significant resources to their respective parties, candidates with serious records appear to perform well despite their public perception. In some cases, voters are also without choices because every candidate running for office has a criminal background.

Criminalization of Politics Effects

Criminalizing politics reduces the number of viable candidates that people can choose from. It goes against the democratic ideal of free and fair elections, which is its cornerstone.  The main issue is that lawbreakers end up making the laws, which undermines the democratic process’ ability to provide effective government. These unwholesome democratic tendencies portray an unfavorable picture of the state institutions of India and the caliber of its elected officials.

Additionally, it causes a rise in the flow of illicit funds both before and after elections, which worsens social corruption and impairs the performance of public employees. It fosters a culture of violence in society, creates a poor example for young people to follow, and erodes public confidence in democracy as a form of government.

Criminalization of Politics Consequences

The quality of India’s democracy is negatively impacted by the presence of people with criminal histories in the country’s politics and legal system. Due to extensive ties to the illegal underworld, huge sums of illegal money are funnelled into the political process.

The criminalization of politics has the consequence of limiting the legal process and increasing trial uncertainty. Criminals entering Indian politics increase crime in daily life. The executive, bureaucracy, legislature, and judiciary are among the state institutions that are badly impacted. Politics being made illegal displays a violent culture in the neighbourhood and is an example of young people.

Criminalization of Politics Measures to Curb

It is necessary to change Section 125A of the Representation of Peoples Act to increase the minimum sentence for falsifying or omitting information in Form 26 in accordance with the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 to a minimum of two years in prison. All individuals with ongoing criminal charges that are punishable by a term of more than five years will be disqualified with the retroactive application, subject to appropriate safeguards.

According to section 125A, submitting a false affidavit carries a two-year sentence. Disqualification should be made possible in the event of a conviction under this. Providing that charges be filed six months prior to the election, the 2nd Administrative Reforms Commission suggested amending Section 8 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 to bar candidates who are accused of severe crimes or corruption from running. Making campaign finance more transparent will make it less appealing for political parties to work with gangsters.

Criminalization of Politics Initiatives and Reforms

Strengthening existing laws related to the criminalization of politics, expediting the resolution of criminal cases against politicians, and ensuring stricter eligibility criteria for candidates. Electoral reform like Encouraging inner-party democracy, transparent candidate selection processes, and stringent mechanisms to prevent the nomination of candidates with criminal backgrounds is needed. Promoting citizen engagement and voter education, encouraging voters to make informed choices and support clean and ethical candidates.

Criminalization of Politics and Role of the Judiciary

Highlight the significant role played by the Supreme Court in addressing the issue of criminalization in politics, including directives such as the disclosure of criminal records, barring individuals with criminal charges from contesting elections, and decriminalization efforts.

Criminalization of Politics UPSC

The criminalization of politics poses a grave threat to democracy and governance in India. It requires a multi-faceted approach involving legal reforms, electoral reforms, and increased public awareness to effectively address this menace. As UPSC aspirants, it is essential to understand and analyze this issue from various perspectives to contribute to the creation of a cleaner and more accountable political system. Students can read all the details related to UPSC by visiting the official website of StudyIQ UPSC Online Coaching.

Sharing is caring!

Criminalization of Politics FAQs

What is criminalization of politics.

The criminalization of politics means the participation of criminals in politics which includes that criminals can contest in the elections and get elected as members of the Parliament and the State legislature.

What are the effects of criminalization in politics?

Sometimes political parties give candidature to people having a criminal background, facing criminal allegations and allegations of corruption. This increases the role of money and muscle power in politics.

What are the statistics of criminalization of politics?

In the year 2009, 30% of MPs in Lok Sabha were against criminal charges. In 2014, 34% of MPs in the Lok Sabha faced criminal charges. The percentage was extremely high in the last Lok Sabha elections.

What is criminalisation of politics?

"Criminalization of politics" is a political buzzword in the United States used in the media, by commentators, bloggers as well as by defenders of high-ranking government officials who have been indicted or have faced criminal or ethical investigations.

What is the cause of criminalization of politics?

The most significant cause of the criminalisation of politics is the profane relationship between bureaucracy and politicians. This unwanted and destructive connection between bureaucracy and political managers increased the scope of the criminalisation of politics.

• indian polity

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• UPSC Online Coaching
• UPSC Exam 2024
• UPSC Syllabus 2024
• UPSC Prelims Syllabus 2024
• UPSC Mains Syllabus 2024
• UPSC Exam Pattern 2024
• UPSC Age Limit 2024
• UPSC Calendar 2024
• UPSC Syllabus in Hindi
• UPSC Full Form

Recent Posts

• UPPSC Exam 2024
• UPPSC Calendar
• UPPSC Syllabus 2024
• UPPSC Exam Pattern 2024
• UPPSC Application Form 2024
• UPPSC Eligibility Criteria 2024
• UPPSC Admit card 2024
• UPPSC Salary And Posts
• UPPSC Cut Off
• UPPSC Previous Year Paper

BPSC Exam 2024

• BPSC 70th Notification
• BPSC 69th Exam Analysis
• BPSC Admit Card
• BPSC Syllabus
• BPSC Exam Pattern
• BPSC Cut Off
• BPSC Question Papers
• MPPSC Prelims Question Paper 2024
• MPPSC Answer Key 2024
• MPPSC Exam Date 2024
• MPPSC Syllabus 2024

SSC CGL 2024

• SSC CGL Exam 2024
• SSC CGL Syllabus 2024
• SSC CGL Cut off
• SSC CGL Apply Online
• SSC CGL Salary

Study Material Categories

• Daily The Hindu Analysis
• Daily Practice Quiz for Prelims
• Daily Answer Writing
• Daily Current Affairs
• Indian Polity
• Environment and Ecology
• Art and Culture
• General Knowledge
• Biographies

IMPORTANT EXAMS

• Terms & Conditions
• Return & Refund Policy
• Privacy Policy

• OUR CENTERS Bangalore Delhi Lucknow Mysuru Srinagar Dharwad Hyderabad

Call us @ 08069405205

Search Here

• An Introduction to the CSE Exam
• Personality Test
• Annual Calendar by UPSC-2024
• Common Myths about the Exam
• About Insights IAS
• Our Mission, Vision & Values
• Director's Desk
• Meet Our Team
• Our Branches
• Careers at Insights IAS
• Daily Current Affairs+PIB Summary
• Insights into Editorials
• Insta Revision Modules for Prelims
• Current Affairs Quiz
• Static Quiz
• Current Affairs RTM
• Insta-DART(CSAT)
• Insta 75 Days Revision Tests for Prelims 2024
• Secure (Mains Answer writing)
• Secure Synopsis
• Ethics Case Studies
• Insta Ethics
• Weekly Essay Challenge
• Insta Revision Modules-Mains
• Insta 75 Days Revision Tests for Mains
• Secure (Archive)
• Anthropology
• Law Optional
• Kannada Literature
• Public Administration
• English Literature
• Medical Science
• Mathematics
• Commerce & Accountancy
• Monthly Magazine: CURRENT AFFAIRS 30
• Content for Mains Enrichment (CME)
• InstaMaps: Important Places in News
• Weekly CA Magazine
• The PRIME Magazine
• Insta Revision Modules-Prelims
• Insta-DART(CSAT) Quiz
• Insta 75 days Revision Tests for Prelims 2022
• Insights SECURE(Mains Answer Writing)
• Interview Transcripts
• Previous Years' Question Papers-Prelims
• Answer Keys for Prelims PYQs
• Solve Prelims PYQs
• Previous Years' Question Papers-Mains
• UPSC CSE Syllabus
• Toppers from Insights IAS
• Testimonials
• Felicitation
• UPSC Results
• Indian Heritage & Culture
• Ancient Indian History
• Medieval Indian History
• Modern Indian History
• World History
• World Geography
• Indian Geography
• Indian Society
• Social Justice
• International Relations
• Agriculture
• Environment & Ecology
• Disaster Management
• Science & Technology
• Security Issues
• Ethics, Integrity and Aptitude

• Indian Heritage & Culture
• Enivornment & Ecology

Criminalization of Politics

Topics Covered:  RPA related issues.

A February 2020 Supreme Court judgement on Criminalisation in politics may have far-reaching consequences for Indian democracy.

• It will first be implemented in the coming Bihar elections in October 2020.

What was the case all about?

The judgment was passed in  a contempt of court case filed against the Chief Election Commissioner of India.

The petition claimed the ECI had failed to take any steps to ensure the implementation of a 2018 judgment of the bench, which had made it mandatory for political parties to declare and publish all criminal cases pending against their candidates.

• The petitioners argued that parties were “circumventing” the 2018 judgment by publishing the details of their candidates’ criminal background in  “obscure and limited circulation newspapers” and “making the webpages on their websites difficult to access”.

The judgment:

The court had asked the particle parties to state “The reasons for such selection, as also as to why other individuals without criminal antecedents could not be selected as candidates.”

• If a political party fails to comply, it would be in contempt of this court’s orders/

Directions issued by the Court:

• It is mandatory for all political parties to publish all details regarding pending criminal cases against their chosen candidates, not only in local newspapers, but also on party websites and social media handles.
• Along with the details of pending cases, the parties will also have to publish “the reasons for such selection, as also as to why other individuals without criminal antecedents could not be selected as candidates”.
• The “reasons” given for selection of the candidates have to be “with reference to the qualifications, achievements and merit of the candidate concerned, and not mere ‘winnability’ at the polls”.

What does the RPA say on this?

Currently, under  the Representation of Peoples (RP) Act,  lawmakers cannot contest elections only after their conviction in a criminal case.

Section 8 of the Representation of the People (RP) Act, 1951 disqualifies a person convicted with a sentence of two years or more from contesting elections. But those under trial continued to be eligible to contest elections.

Main reasons for Criminalization:

• Lack of governance.

What is the way out?

• Political parties should themselves refuse tickets to the tainted.
• The RP Act should be amended to debar persons against whom cases of a heinous nature are pending from contesting elections.
• Fast-track courts should decide the cases of tainted legislators quickly.
• Bring greater transparency in campaign financing .
• The Election Commission of India (ECI) should have the power to audit the financial accounts of political parties.

Need for reforms:

In 2004, 24% of the members of Parliament had criminal cases against them.

• In 2009, that went up to 30%.
• In 2014, it went up to 34%.
• In 2019, as many as 43% of MPs had criminal cases.

InstaLinks :

Prelims Link:

• Section 8 of the RP Act.
• SC guidelines.
• ECI- composition and functions.
• CEC- appointment.
• Powers of Election Commission on matters related to election of candidates.

Mains Link:

Discuss the concerns associated criminalisation of politics and what the Supreme Court done to address these concerns?

Sources: the Hindu.

• Our Mission, Vision & Values
• Director’s Desk
• Commerce & Accountancy
• Previous Years’ Question Papers-Prelims
• Previous Years’ Question Papers-Mains
• Environment & Ecology
• Science & Technology