Explained: Disqualification Of Sharad Yadav As Rajya Sabha Member [Read Notification]

On December 4, the Vice President, M.Venkaiah Naidu, in his capacity as the Chairman, Rajya Sabha, disqualified the Janata Dal (U) Leader, Sharad Yadav, as a member of the Rajya Sabha, under the Anti-Defection Act.Here are some questions and answers on the issue:Q: So, is it the fastest decision by any Presiding Officer, under the Anti-Defection Act?A: It appears so. The Leader of the Janata Dal (U) in Rajya Sabha, Ram Chandra Prasad Singh, filed a petition before the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha on September 2, under Article 102(2) read with Paragraph 6 of the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution and Rule 6 of the Members of the Rajya Sabha (Disqualification on Ground of Defection) Rules, 1985, praying for Yadav’s disqualification. So, the Chairman has taken just around three months to decide the case, although Yadav sought more time to respond to the petition.What was the ground which Ram Chandra Prasad Singh invoked in his petition? Well, he said that Yadav was elected to the Rajya Sabha on the JD(U) ticket from Bihar on July 8, 2016. He alleged that by his repeated conduct, public/press statements against the JD(U) and its leadership and openly aligning with a rival political party, namely, the Rashtriya Janata Dal, he has voluntarily given up the membership of the party.He alleged that Yadav, instead of adhering to the unanimous decision taken on July 26, 2017 by the JD(U) and its President, Nitish Kumar, to withdraw from the Mahagathbandhan and the coalition Government formed in Bihar in 2015, started anti-party activities by publicly denouncing the party’s decision.Another allegation is that Yadav campaigned with RJD leaders and workers between the 10th and the 12th of August, 2017 in different districts of Bihar and attended the public rally called by the rival political party, RJD, in Patna on August 27, despite written directive from K.C.Tyagi, Secretary-General of the party advising him not to attend the rally. Tyagi had warned Yadav that his participation in the rally would be construed not only against the principles of high morality, but also as voluntarily giving up the membership of the JD(U).The petitioner had annexed newspaper clippings, media reports and videos as proof of the allegations.Did the Rajya Sabha Chairman follow the principle of natural justice by giving Yadav an opportunity to effectively defend himself?Well, it is debatable. Yadav, vide letters dated 15th and 18th September, sought extension of one month time for furnishing his comments on the petition. However, the Chairman granted him extension of time only till September 25, for furnishing his comments. Yadav furnished his comments on September 22.He also sought permission to argue his case through his lawyers. He suggested the names of Kapil Sibal, and Devdutt Kamat to be his advocates, besides four more advocates.The Chairman, relying on precedents, declined the request.What was Yadav’s defence to the allegations that he defected?Yadav stated that he, being a founding member of the JD(U) has remained committed to its principles and continues to be a member of the party and has never intended to give up, least of all, voluntarily give up the membership of the party or form a new political party.Yadav also contended that the question of ‘voluntarily giving up membership of the party’ could be determined only after decision on the question as to which is the ‘real party’. Since his faction’s application, under Paragraph 15 of the Election Symbols (Reservaton and Allotment) Order, 1968, requesting for recognition as the real JD(U) on the basis of majority support commanded by them within the JD(U), is pending before the Election Commission of India (ECI), a decision on the petition might be taken only after final decision by the ECI.Interestingly, Yadav also alleged that it was Nitish Kumar and his faction, who have voluntarily given up the membership of the JD(U) by withdrawing from the Mahagathbandhan, which was formed as a common front against the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and subsequently aligning with the BJP, thus blatantly betraying the trust reposed by the people of Bihar and their mandate.Yadav’s main contention was that criticism of the decision of party leaders, taken in violation of the constitution of the party, does not entail voluntarily giving up the membership of the party, under the Tenth Schedule.Yadav also questioned the use of newspaper articles and media clippings in the absence of any corroborative material. He also annexed similar clippings and videos in support of his allegations against Nitish Kumar.Why did the Chairman not consider reference of the petition to the Committee of Privileges?Well, the Chairman observed that this would entail a longer time frame for conduct of preliminary inquiry and preparation and submission of final report, ultimately causing delay, which he claimed, is against the very grain and object of the Tenth Schedule. He also justified it saying allowing a...

Explained: Disqualification Of Sharad Yadav As Rajya Sabha Member [Read Notification]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags