What is the issue?
- Supreme Court has recently mandated candidates aspiring to contest elections to also disclosure their source of income in addition to other aspects.
- This is in line with plethora of court directives in the same domain.
What are the significant aspects of the verdict?
- Pronouncing the verdict on a petition filed by the NGO, Lok Prahari, SC ordered one more directive for further refining the electoral process.
- Adding to the growing body of judicially inspired electoral reforms, the SC has asked for the additional disclosure of income source by aspiring candidates.
- The Centre has been asked to legislate on the same, along with the mandating the disclosure of wealth of the candidates, their spouse and dependants.
- Further, SC has vouched for a permanent mechanism to investigate any disproportionate increase in the assets of lawmakers while in office.
- The court has also stressed that non-disclosure of assets and their sources would amount to “corrupt practice” under Representation of People Act, 1951.
- As the order might be perceived as judicial overreach into the lawmaking arena, the court has asked the parliament to legislate on its directives.
What forms the basis for a judicial intervention?
- The act of voting is an expression of free speech, and that voters are rightfully required to be informed of all relevant details.
- This logic had nudged the demand for candidates should furnish details of any criminal antecedents, educational qualifications and assets.
- If disclosure of assets is mandatory, it is only logical to expect that the sources of income are also revealed, to establish conformity.
- The importance for this clause is furthered by the fact that dramatic increase of assets is seen for many candidates in every successive election.
- Notably, previous judicial orders drove the conception of ‘NOTA’ and the immediate disqualification of politicians from office upon conviction.
How does the future look?
- Lawmakers amassing wealth through unethical means are concerns that need to be addressed through new norms.
- The idea of a permanent mechanism to collect data about the assets of legislators and periodically examine them is laudable.
- The court also envisions a body that would make recommendations for prosecution or disqualification based on its own findings.
- It is now upon the Centre and the Election Commission to work out the modalities and powers for such authorities.
- The larger message from the verdict is that a fully informed electorate and transparent candidature will be key components of future elections in India.
Source: The Hindu
