National Law Institute University, Bhopal
Pag e|1
Project of Criminology On
Criminalization of Politics in India: A Study of Politicians in the 15th Lok Sabha with Criminal Records Guided by: -
Submitted by: -
Mr. G. S. Bajpai
Sanchit Singh
Professor and Chairperson,
Email id –
[email protected]
Centre for Civil & Criminal Justice Admin.
DECLARATION Pag e|2
‘The text reported in the project is the outcome of my own efforts and no
part of this report has been copied in any unauthorized manner and no part in
it has been incorporated without due acknowledgement’
Sanchit Singh
Acknowledgement
Every work is the outcome of efforts of many people and this work is no exception to it. I would like to sincerely thank my respected Criminology teacher Mr. G. S. Bajpai who had helped me with developing the necessary understanding of the topic and for his patience without which this project couldn’t have been completed.
Table of Contents
Pag e|3
•
Introduction………………………………………………………………………5
•
Review of Literature……………………………………………………………..6
•
Present Study……………………………………………………………………..8
•
Observations and Findings………………………………………………………9
•
Criminal Theories……………………………………………………………….16
•
Existing Legal Provisions……………………………………………………….18 Special privileges available to MPs……………………………………………..19
•
Recommendations……………………………………………………………….21
•
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..23
•
References………………………………………………………………………..24
(1) Introduction
Pag e|4
Democracy implies rule of law and holding of free elections to ascertain the will of the people. But in quite recent times this peaceful process of social change has been much vitiated. Violence, rigging, booth capturing etc. has become the order of the day.
Criminalization of politics has become a headache for the Indian democracy. It’s shameful to admit that in the world’s largest democracy the cult of the gun prevails; Goondas and Criminals are hired to capture booths and kill political rivals etc. In this way the entire democratic process is negated.
What’s more surprising and rather shameful is that these people even after committing serious criminal offences make their way to the Parliament and Assemblies, which is the highest governing body in the country. Thus you can imagine what will be the fate of the nation, if power is given to undeserving criminals.
In this project I have tried to identify a few Politicians in the current i.e. 15 th Lok Sabha, with criminal records. I have discussed in detail what prompts them to commit crime with the help of different criminal theories with respect to the Indian context. Moreover, discussing the current legal policies in curbing the menace of criminalization and the reforms required to make the world’s largest democracy clean and efficient enough to deliver.
Review of Literature
Law Commission of India Reports:
Pag e|5
Reform of the Electoral Laws (Report No. 170) [1999] INLC 170 (1 May 1999) –
Background - Whether in a parliamentary form of government or a Presidential Pre sidential form, indeed in every democracy, democracy, the process of election should be free, fair and equitable. Pag Fortunately, Fortunately, our Constitution seek to provide for a free and fair election but problems e | 6 have been arising in this regard on account of division in our polity on the basis of religion, caste, language, region and race. Free and fair elections elections are the very foundation of democratic institutions. However there has been a steady deterioration in the standards, practices and pronouncements of the political political class, which fights fights the elections. Money-power, Money-power, muscle-power, corrupt practices and unfair means are being freely employed to win the elections. Over the years, several measures have been taken by Parliament to amend the laws relating to elections with a view to check the aforementioned forces. This report, which has been prepared after extensive consultations, is a step in the said process. It is hoped that Parliament will take prompt action to give them legislative imprimatur. imprimatur.
•
THE REPRE RE PRESENTATION SENTATION OF THE T HE PEOPLE PEO PLE ACT, 1951 : This act basically came in force for ce to provide the necessary guidelines for the electoral process in India. It suggests every procedure involved in the electoral process; from the conduct of polls, the machinery involved for free fr ee and fair elections, to disqualification of members on certain grounds.
Our focus is basically on the part III of the act which talks about the disqualification of members on certain grounds. CHAPTER III - D isqualifications for Membership of Parliament and State Legislatures, from s.7 to s. 11 talks about the disqualification of members
•
. The Constitution of India – The constitution of India talks under s. 105 about certain rights and privileges under P arliaments and its members. the subject of, Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliaments These immunities give the member certain special privileges to carry out their duties in the parliament.
•
Criminal Behaviour – A Psychological Approach, 5 th Edition, Written by – Curt R. Bartol, Published by – Prentice Hall Inc. U.S.A. – This literature was extremely helpful in understanding the human nature and criminal theories, which explain the phenomenon of criminalization of politics. Pag e|7
•
Study of Composition of 15 th Lok Sabha by National Election Watch with the help of Affidavits Affidavits provided by the Election Commission of India – This data base was the main m ain source of information regarding the availability of statistics about the criminal records of Members of Parliament.
The stats were taken directly from the affidavits available on The Election Commission’s Commission’s website.
(2) Present Study (A) Stateme Sta tement nt of o f Problem: Prob lem: Criminalization of politics in India: I ndia: A study of politicians in the 15 th Lok Sabha with criminal records. This is about studying the composition of parliamentarians with criminal records in the current Lok Sabha S abha so as to obtain a pattern whether the crime is centralized or scattered. Then, analysing with the help of different theories of crim e the motivation behind the criminal acts. Studying the legal provisions in force to address the problem and suggesting reforms and solution to curb the menace.
(B) Methodology This project work has been designed as a Doctrinal study. study.
– this project tries to address the following 4 objectives(i) Objectives – this Pag e|8 •
•
•
•
To study the composition of MPs with criminal records. Analysing the reasons behind committing of crimes with the help of different criminal theories. Role of existing legal provisions regarding the qualification of candidates. Are they efficient enough to prevent criminals from contesting? Steps to curtail the criminalization of politics.
(ii) Hypothesis – we suppose that the root cause of crime among politicians is the result of obsession with power and fearlessness of law. law. And And crime is a shortcut to name, fame and money.
(iii) (iii ) Sources Sour ces of Sec Second ondary ary Data Collect Coll ection ion – •
Books on criminal theories and constitutional provisions.
•
Internet Databases including the websites of various newspapers like DNA, The Hindu etc.
•
Magazines like Economical & Political Weekly, India Today and Frontline.
•
Government Websites Websites hosted by National Informatics Centre.
•
Case studies from Manupatra.
(C) Observations and Findings •
Composition of Members in the Parliament with Criminal Records-
[The following statistics are part of the research conducted by National Election Watch, Watch, with the help of data given by the election commission of India]
the following tables will certainly give an idea about the composition of members with various kind of criminal records in the Parliament Pag e|9
Analysis of 2009 Lok Sabha Winners based on Criminal Background New Delhi: May 16: National Election Watch NEW), a nationwide campaign comprising
of more than 1200 NGOs and other citizen led organizations, has been working on electoral reforms, improving democracy and governance in India. India. This is a press release for results of of these elections for Lok Sabha constituencies
General: A total of 8070 candidates representing 369 parties contested in the recently
held elections. Out of 369 parties, only 36 parties have been successful in sending one or more MPs into the Lok Sabha. 333 parties that contested elections did not win even a single seat. And 19 parites have 3 or less MPs in i n the newly formed Lok Sabha.
NEW has looked at affidavits of 533 declared winners (MPs) for f or the Lok Sabha 2009 out of 541 declared results so far. Affidavits of 8 new MPs (all from Tamil T amil Nadu) are not available on Election commission’s website and about 10 affidavits have not been properly scanned and uploaded. Unclear details in them have not been taken into account. We have requested the Electoral office of each state to have these affidavits re-scanned and be put on the website, so that general public can access this information.
MPs with criminal records
2004 128
2009 150
Increase 22
% increase 17.2%
Total Criminal cases
429
412
-17
-4 %
MPs with serious criminal records
55
72
17
30.9%
Serious charges
302
213
-89
-29.5%
Pag The maximum criminal charges are against INC’s Gujarat’s MP VITTHALBHAI e | HANSRAJBHA HANSRAJBHAII RADADIYA. RADADIYA. He has a total of 16 cases out of which 5 cases are of 10
serious nature. The maximum no of serious IPC charges are against Jagdis Sharma JD(U).
The top 10 list of MPs with serious criminal charges is given below.
Serial Name
State/Dist
Serious Constituency Party Ag A ge IPC Counts
No of Cases in which Accused
No. of Cases in which Total Convicted
1
Ja dis Sharma
BIHAR
Jahanabad
JD(U) 58 17 17
6
0
6
2
BAL KUMAR PATEL KUMAR PATEL
UTTAR PRADESH
Mirzapur
SP
48 13
10
0
10
3
PRABHATSINH PRATAPSINH CHAUHAN
GUJARA T
Panchmahal BJP
67 10
3
0
3
UTTAR PRADESH KERALA
Phulpur
BS P
42 8
4
0
4
5
KAPIL MUNI KARWARIYA P.Karunakaran
Kasaragod
CPM 64 6
12
0
12
6
Lalu Prasad
BIHAR
Saran
RJD 60 6
2
0
2
7
KUNVARJIBHAI MOHANBHAI BAVALIYA
GUJARAT
Ra R ajkot
INC
54 6
2
0
2
8
VITTHALBHAI HANSRAJBHAI RADADIYA
GUJARA T
Porbandar
INC
51 5
16
0
16
UTTAR PRADESH
Pilibhit
BJP
29 5
6
0
6
GUJARA T
Navsari
BJP
54 54 5
6
0
6
4
9 10
FEROZE VARUN GANDHI CHANDRAKANT RAGHUNATH PATIL
MPs with criminal background party w ise : Party
Total MPs
MPs with Criminal Charges
Percentage of MPs with Criminal Charges
MPs with Serious Criminal Charges
Percentage Percentage of MPs with Serious Criminal Charges
BJP INC SP S HS JD(U) BSP
116 202 22 11 20 21
42 41 8 8 7 6
36.21 20.30 36.36 72.73 35.00 28.57
19 12 7 3 3 6
16.38 5.94 31.82 27.27 15.00 28.57
BJ D
14
4
28.57
1
7.14
AITC N CP
19 9
4 4
21.05 44.44
4 3
21.05 33.33
Pag e| 11
DMK RJD CP M ADMK RLD JD(S) TDP
16 4 15 7 5 3 6
3 3 3 3 2 2 2
18.75 75.00 20.00 42.86 40.00 66.67 33.33
1 2 1 3 1 1 1
6.25 50.00 6.67 42.86 20.00 33.33 16.67
JVM
1
1
100.00
0
0.00
VCK
1
1
100.00
1
100.00
AIMIM SAD IND JMM TRS AIFB
1 4 9 2 2 2
1 1 1 1 1 1
100.00 25.00 11.11 50.00 50.00 50.00
1 0 0 1 0 1
100.00 0.00 0.00 50.00 0.00 50.00
Total
533
150
28.14%
72
13.51%
MPs with criminal background state wise:
Percentage of MPs with Serious Criminal Charges
State
Total MPs
MPs with Criminal Charges
MPs with Percentage of MPs with Serious Criminal Criminal Charges Charges
UTTAR PRADESH
79
30
37.97
21
26.58
MAHARASHTRA
48
23
47.92
9
18.75
BIHAR
40
17
42.50
6
15.00
ANDHRA PRADESH 42 42
11
26.19
3
7.14
GUJARAT
11
42.31
7
26.92
26
KARNATAKA
28
9
32.14
5
17.86
WEST BENGAL
42
7
16.67
7
16.67
TAMIL NADU
31
7
22.58
5
16.13
JHARKHAND
14
6
42.86
1
7.14
KERALA
20
6
30.00
2
10.00
ORISSA
21
5
23.81
2
9.52
MADHYA PRADESH 29 P ATBTISGARH 13 CU HN HJA 1 RAJASTHAN 24 HARYANA 10 JAMMU & KASHMIR 6
4 2
13.79 15 8.3 18
2 1 0
6.90 7 0.6 09 0
2 2 1
8.33 20.00 16.67
0 1 0
0.00 10.00 0.00
NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF 7 DELHI
1
14.29
0
0.00
DADRA & NAGAR HAVELI
1
1
100.00
0
0.00
1
1
100.00
0
0.00
14 5
1 1
7.14 20.00
0 0
0.00 0.00
533
150
28.14%
72
13.51%
ANDAMAN & NICOBAR ISLANDS A SS AM UTTARAKHAND Total
Pag e| 12
Pag e| 13
Serial
No. of Cases in which Convicted
Total cases
Name
State/Dist
Constituency
P a rt y
1
RAJKUMARI RATNA SINGH
UTTAR PRADESH
Pratapgarh
INC
49
3
6
0
6
2
Angadi Suresh Channabasappa Channabasapp a KARNATAKA
Belgaum
BJP
55
1
2
0
2
3
TAMBIDURAI.M TAMIL NADU
K a r ur
ADMK
62
1
2
0
2
UTTAR PRADESH
Domariyaganj
INC
59
0
1
0
1
4
JAGDAMBIKA
Age
No of Cases in which Accused
Serious IPC Counts
5
Sushil Kumar
BIHAR
Aurangabad
JD(U)
43
2
4
0
4
6
P.Karunakaran
Kasaragod
CPM
64
6
12
0
12
7
HARSH VINAY KUMAR VINAY KUMAR ALIAS VINNU
KERALA UTTAR PRADESH
Maharajganj
INC
61
0
3
0
3
Shrawasti
INC
45
4
9
0
9
8
UTTAR PRADESH
Crorepati MPs who have crimi nal records and have not declared their ir PA N deta de tails ils -
[Candidates' affidavit with nomination papers is the source of this analysis.]
www.adrindia.org, www.nationalelectionwatch.org,
[email protected],
Pag e| 14
Observations:
MPs with criminal background:
There are 150 newly elected MPs with criminal cases pending against them. Out of these, there are 73 MPs having serious charges against them. Here is the high level summary of the new lok sabha:
•
Affidavits available for MPs - 533
•
MPs with criminal charges - 150 (28.14 %)
•
MPs with serious criminal charges - 72 (13.51 %)
•
Total criminal cases against MPs - 412
•
Total serious IPC sections against MPs – 213
As compared to 2004, the no of MPs with criminal records has gone up. There were 128 MPs with criminal cases in 2004 Lok Sabha out of which 55 had serious criminal records. There is an increase of about 17.2% in MPs with criminal records and 30.9% increase in the number of MPs with serious criminal records.
MPs with criminal background part y w is e:
BJP has maximum MPs having criminal cases – 42 MPs have criminal cases against them, out of which 17 MPs have serious criminal cases against them.
It has followed by congress – 41 MPs with criminal cases out of which 12 MPs have serious charges against them. SP has 8 MPs with criminal cases out of which 7 has serious charges, followed by Shivsena which has 8 MPs with criminal charges out of which 3 have serious charges.
MPs with criminal background state wise:
Amongst the states, UP has maximum MPs with criminal cases (total of 31 out of which 22 have serious charges against them). Maharashtra is second with 23 MPs having criminal cases out of which 9 have serious cases against them. It is followed by Bihar, Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat. The full details of all states are give in the table below:
Criminal Record, Crorepati and No PAN -
Out of 25 Crorepati MPs who have not declared their PAN, 8 have criminal cases against them. There are 17 serious IPC charges against them including i ncluding attempt to murder, robbery, dacoity and forgery. 2 Crorepati MPs have attempt to murder charges against them. - Ratna Singh INC MP from Pratapgarh (2 attempts to murder charges) and Vinay Kumar INC MP from Shrawasti, UP (3 murder charges).
Pag e| 15
Underlying Assumptions about Human Nature, & Criminal theories with respect to Criminalization of politics –
1) Humans are creature of conformity who always wants to do the right thing – An excellent example of this conformity perspective in criminology is the ‘Strain Theory’ of ‘Robert K. Merton’.
Merton’s Strain theory argues that humans are fundamentally conforming beings. Most members of a given society desire what the other member of the society desire. For e.g. in America, accumulation of wealth or status is all important. However, it’s very important to understand that the access or means for reaching these goals are not equally available to everyone in the society. Some have the education, social network, personal contacts, family influence and in some cases might. And some do not have these opportunities.
The strain theory predicts that crime and delinquency occur when there is a perceived perceived discrepancy between the materialistic materialistic values and goals cherished and held in high esteem by a society and the availability of the legitimate means for reaching these goals
Thus, it can be easily contrasted in the Indian scenario that you will find most of the politicians who are committing crimes are basically criminal turned politicians, who in an attempt to legitimize their power got to politics. People who are educated are comparatively less prone to commit crime rather they will try to stick to democratic means. For e.g. you will find crimes in the political
Pag e| 16
constituencies constituencies where there is illiteracy, poverty and no development at all. People from this marginalized areas in search of power p ower resort to might. 2) Expectancy Theory – Julian Rotter is best known for drawing attention to the importance of expectations about the consequences of behavior. In other words, before doing anything, we ask, “what has happened to me before this situation and what will I gain this time?”
Applying Rotter’s theory to criminal behavior we should say that when people engage in unlawful conduct, they expect to gain something in the form of status, power, security, affection, material goods or living conditions. it becomes very clear from the above statement that politicians for instance will not hesitate to engage themselves in some unlawful activity if they gain something in return, preferably power or status.
3) Imitational Aspects of Social Learning – Bandura introduced the idea of, what he called observational learning or modeling, to the social learning process.
He contended that much of our behavior is initially acquired by watching others, who are called models. The observed behavior of the model is also more likely to be imitated if the observer sees the model receive an award. Conversely, Conversely, it’s less likely to be imitated if the model is punished. Bandura believes much like Rotter that once a person decides to use a newly acquired behavior, whether he or she will maintain that behavior depends on the prospects of the potential gain. Let’s understand this principle in the light of our topic. The newcomers in politics will find a model or guru in the political field, and if he follows a politician who has certainly achieved name and money by doing criminal acts, it’s highly likely that he will also follow the same footsteps. But if people have a good example that committing crime is a very serious mistake in society, people are less likely to resort to criminal behavior.
Pag e| 17
Existing Legal Provisions to Discourage Politicians with Criminal Records
The electoral law’s policy on criminals is as follows:
(i) Criminal accused even if charge- sheeted and undergoing trial can stand for election irrespective of how serious the charge is.
(ii) Candidates convicted of communal and social offences shall be disqualified for six years if punished by fine; and if imprisoned further six years from release.
(iii) Candidates convicted of profiteering, adulteration of food and medicine or under the Dowry Act shall be disqualified for six years from release if convicted for more than six months.
(iv)Candidates convicted of any crime for 2 years or more shall be disqualified for six years from release.
(v) Candidates who are ar e sitting MP’s effectively continue as MP until the final appeal to the highest court through an MP’s loop-hole.
Also there are provisions of s. 7 to s. 11 which on certain grounds disqualify a member from the house. But because of slow justice delivery system, criminals always are under trial and are thus allowed to contest the election and they win too. But thanks to judicial activism, 4 candidates including Sanjay Dutt were barred from contesting the elections in 2009 general elections. This move was welcomed by many of the jurists. They said that stricter laws need to be implemented so that criminals go to “prison and not parliament”.
Pag e| 18
Special privileges to Members of Parliament
There are many privileges given to the Member of Parliament under s. 105 of the Indian Constitution. They are as follows –
1. Subject to the provisions of this Constitution and the rules and standing
orders regulating the procedure of Parliament, there shall be freedom of speech in Parliament.
2. No Member of Parliament shall be liable to any proceeding in any court in
respect of anything said or any vote given by him in Parliament or any committee thereof, and no person shall be so liable in respect of the publication by or under the authority of either House of Parliament of any report, paper, votes or proceedings.
3. In other respects, the powers, privileges and immunities of each House of
Parliament, and the members and the committee of each House, shall be such as may from time to time be defined by Parliament by law, and until so defined, [shall be those of that House and of its members and committees immediately before the coming into force of Section 15 of the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act, 1978].
4. The provision of clauses (1), (2), and (3) shall apply in relation to persons
who by virtue of this Constitution have the right to speak in, and otherwise to take part in the proceedings of, a House of Parliament or any committee thereof as they apply in relation to the members of Parliament.
In relation to the project we’ll focus on the Law Courts and Privileges & Freedom from Arrest;
Article 105, so also Article 194 subjects the powers, privileges and immunities
Pag e| 19
of each House as well as all its members and all its committees not only to the laws made by the appropriate legislature but also to all other provisions of the Constitution. Both these articles far from dealing with the legislative powers of the Houses of Parliament or of State Legislature respectively are confined in scope to such powers of each House as it may exercise separately functioning as a House . A House of Parliament or Legislature cannot try anyone or any case directly as a court of justice can, but it can proceed quasi judicially in cases of contempt of its authority or take up motions concerning its privileges and immunities in order to seek removal of obstructions to the due performance of its legislative functions. If any question of jurisdiction arises as to a certain matter, it has to be decided by a court of law in appropriate proceedings. For example, the jurisdiction to try a criminal offence such as murder, committed even within a House vests in ordinary courts and not in a of Parliament or in a State Legislature. Also, a House of Parliament or State Legislature cannot in exercise of any supposed powers under Articles 105 and 194 decide election disputes for which special authorities have been constituted under the Representation of People Act, 1951 enacted in compliance with Article 329.
In India freedom from arrest has been limited to civil causes and has not been applied to arrest on criminal charges or to detention under the Preventive Detention Act. Also there is no privilege if arrest is made under s.151 Criminal Procedure Code. It has been held in K. Anandan Kumar v. Chief Secretary, Government of Madras , that matters of Parliament do not enjoy any special
status as compared to an ordinary citizen in respect of valid orders of detention.
Recommendations to Curb Criminalization of Politics
Pag e| 20
Promot Pro moting ing Intra Intr a – Party art y Democracy Democr acy and Transpar Trans parenc ency y –
Whether by design or by omission, our Constitution does not provide for the constitution and working of the political parties, though they are at the heart of a parliamentary democracy. A parliamentary democracy without political parties is inconceivable. Yet the the Constitution (except the Tenth Schedule which was inserted only in the year 1985) does not even speak of political parties whereas article 21 of the German Constitution (Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, 1949), which Constitution was also enacted almost simultaneously with our Constitution, provides for the establishment and working of the political parties. The Article reads thus: Article 21 (Parties) (1) the parties shall help form the political will of the people. They may be freely established. Their internal organisation shall conform to democratic principles. They shall publicly account for the sources and use of their funds and for their assets. Thus if the party doesn’t allow candidates with criminal records to contest in the election just imagine, how fair and free would be the democratic process in India. Fast Track Courts for Politicians with Criminal Records – many criminals
are just allowed to contest in the elections just because they are not convicted and under the trial of court. This practice can be avoided if special arrangements are made for speedy trial of the politicians with criminal records. Because it needs to be understood that such people should not be allowed to sit in the highly esteemed house of parliament, which decides the fate of the country.
Pag e| 21
Stricter Laws – stricter laws need to be implemented to prevent criminals from
contesting the election. And once convicted he must be barred from contesting any election for the next 10 years or so. Plus parties with more no. of criminals must be blacklisted and disciplinary action must be taken.
Conclusion: Matters of concern ern
Pag e| 22
The criminalization criminalization of politics politics continues to be a very big concern, with an increase in the number of MPs with criminal records in 2004 from 128 to 150 in 2009. Even the number of MPs with serious criminal cases has gone up. The biggest reason for this seems to be the undemocratic and autocratic selection and nomination of candidates by political parties. In order to ensure the win ability of candidates, parties ignored honesty to give preference to muscle power and money power.
As media reports seem to indicate, the misuse of monetary incentives to buy votes has increased sharply since last elections and continues to be a source of threat to real democracy. While voter awareness on this issue is very high, the problem is that those who win after spending huge amounts are unlikely to focus focus on good governanc governance. e. They are more more likely likely to focus focus on recover recovering ing the funds they spent and on giving favors to those who supported their campaigns.
Not only the new government must tackle these issues on a priority basis and include them in their agenda but it’s very important on people’s part to be aware of not voting for the wrong person and be a part of ‘No to Criminals in Politics’
References
Pag e| 23
•
Bartol Curt R. (2001). Criminal behavior – A Psychosocial
Approach, fifth edition, Prentice Hall Inc.
•
•
•
REFORM OF THE ELECTORAL LAWS (Report No. 170) [1999] INLC 170 (1 May 1999), Law Commission of India Reports. Representation of the People’s Act, 1951 National Election Watch, Lok Sabha Analysis, http://nationalelectionwatch.org/files/new/pdfs/Lok%20Sabha %20high%20level%20analysis.pdf
•
National Election Watch, Post – Election Analysis, http://www.domain-b.com/economy/general/post_election.pdf
•
P. M. Bakshi (2009).The Constitution of India, Universal Law Publications.
•
http://www.manupatra.com
Pag e| 24
