Union Government Defends Six-Year Disqualification for Convicted Lawmakers
The Centre opposes a lifetime ban on convicted lawmakers, asserting that the current six-year disqualification is reasonable and constitutional
The Union government has opposed a plea seeking a lifetime ban on convicted lawmakers from contesting elections, defending the existing legal provisions in the Representation of the People Act, 1951. In an affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court, the Centre argued that limiting the disqualification period to six years after the completion of a lawmaker’s jail term is both constitutional and reasonable.
The case stems from a petition seeking a lifetime ban on convicted legislators from contesting elections, arguing that such a measure would enhance accountability and ensure that convicted individuals are permanently barred from holding public office. However, the Centre contended that there is "nothing inherently unconstitutional" about restricting the effect of penalties over time. The government emphasized that the current provisions of the Representation of the People Act are based on principles of "proportionality and reasonability."
In its affidavit, the Centre stated that Parliament, as the supreme law-making body, has the discretion to determine the duration of disqualification for convicted lawmakers. The government noted that the six-year disqualification period after completion of a sentence serves as an effective deterrent against corruption and other offenses committed by public representatives, without imposing undue harshness on them.
The Union law ministry’s affidavit further clarified that the disqualification provisions under the law are limited by time as a matter of parliamentary policy, and it would be inappropriate for the court to impose a lifetime ban, which was not part of the original law. The government argued that the existing framework, which allows a convicted lawmaker to return to public life after serving their sentence, strikes a fair balance between punishment and rehabilitation.
The plea for a lifetime disqualification was filed in response to concerns about lawmakers who have been convicted of serious offenses yet continue to contest elections and retain their positions. Supporters of the petition argue that a permanent disqualification would deter corruption and restore public trust in the political system.
As the case progresses, the Supreme Court is set to examine the constitutional validity of the current provisions in the Representation of the People Act and whether they should be amended to impose stricter penalties on convicted lawmakers.