It is absurd to disqualify Rahul Gandhi when the matter is scheduled for appeal in the higher courts and the move amounts to an abuse of the constitutional system
UPDATE – Mon 3/27/23 12:47am
It is absurd to disqualify Rahul Gandhi when the matter is scheduled for appeal in the higher courts and the move amounts to an abuse of the constitutional system
Hyderabad: Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s swift disqualification from the Lok Sabha, a day after his conviction in a Gujarat court in a defamation case, was highly reprehensible and sparked growing criticism political vindictiveness and the weakening of democratic liberties. The notice issued by the Lok Sabha Secretariat to disqualify the leader of the opposition under Section 8(3) of the People’s Representatives Act 1951 is strange, less than 24 hours after the Surat court sentenced him to two years in prison for Jailed in criminal defamation case for “surname Modi” remarks. Disqualifying him is absurd and amounts to an abuse of the constitutional system when the matter is scheduled for appeal in a higher court. This is a clear example of the gross abuse of defamation laws to stifle free speech and settle political grievances. Speaking at an election rally in Karnataka in April 2019, Rahul suggested that every Modi is a thief. The comment may have been in poor taste and reprehensible, but the punishment was out of proportion to the alleged violation and the ensuing disqualification tinged with political hate. A written apology would have served a just cause instead of a harsh two-year prison sentence. The trial court was supposed to have taken inspiration from Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s apology spree in 2018 for his accusations against Nitin Gadkari, Kapil Sibal Lamented remarks by political opponents such as Kapil Sibal and Bikram Singh Majithia.
There is a familiar pattern in the BJP leadership’s attack campaign, amplified by its social media warriors, who target political opponents, especially descendants of the Nehru family. Rahul’s recent remarks in London about the state of democracy in India provided enough ammunition for saffron lawmakers who have been demanding an apology from him and even stalling parliament on the issue. There is also a hint of irony in this unpleasant disqualification. It was Rahul’s own recklessness to publicly tear up the UPA statute, which would have kept convicted lawmakers in office until the appeals were dealt with, that seemed to come back to haunt him. Under the People’s Representation Act, lawmakers who are sentenced to two years or more in prison are automatically disqualified from the date of conviction. Probation and a suspended conviction are necessary to evade disqualification. Prominent politicians facing disqualification under the RP Act include RJD supreme leader Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was disqualified from the Lok Sabha after his conviction in a fodder fraud case in September 2013, and J Jayalalithaa who had to resign in Tamil Nadu She took up the ministerial role in September 2014 after being jailed for four years in a disproportionate assets case.
