Polity and Constitution (Part - 2) - Current Affairs, March 2017 PDF Download

1.7. ELECTORAL REFORMS

1.7.1. LIFE TIME BAN OF CONVICTED LAWMAKERS
Why in news?

• Election commission (EC) has supported a Public Interest Litigation in Supreme Court demanding a life time ban on convicted politicians from contesting elections and entering legislature.

• EC is of the view that such a uniform ban is in spirit of Fundamental rights of the Constitution including Right to Equality.

Present Provisions for banning convicted lawmakers
Section 8 of Representation of People Act, 1951 lays down certain rules for disqualification of MP’s and MLA’s such as:

• Under Section 8 (1), (2) of the Act if any of the lawmakers are convicted of crimes like rape; murder; practicing Untouchability or Sati; violating Foreign Exchange Regulation Act; causing enmity over religion, language or region; indulging in electoral violations, insulting Indian Constitution; importing and exporting banned goods, indulging in terrorist activities; etc. will be disqualified for a minimum period of six years. It is irrespective of whether they are fined or imprisoned.

• Crimes under section 8(1) and 8(2) are related to various acts of Indian Penal Code; Protection of Civil Rights Act 1955; Prevention of Corruption Act 1988; Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967, etc.

• Moreover any lawmaker convicted of any other offence under section 8(3) and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years, he/she will be disqualified from date of conviction and further six years from the time released.

• Section 8(4) of RPA, 1951 which had provisions for convicted lawmakers to hold on to their seats provided they filed an appeal in higher court within three months of their conviction against the order of lower court. However in 2013 Lily Thomas vs. Union of India case, SC struck down section 8(4) of RPA, 1951 calling it unconstitutional.

• Henceforth there is automatic disqualification (his/her seat becomes automatically becomes vacant) of any lawmakers if they are convicted under sections 8 (1), 8 (2) and 8 (3).

Argument for

• This will be help in Decriminalization of politics. As per Association for Democratic Reforms in 16th Lok Sabha (2014) 34% of newly elected MP’s have criminal cases filed against them. In 2009 this figure was 30%.

• It will act as a deterrent factor in future for candidate to not indulge in criminal activities.

• As candidates with clean background entering the legislature, common people will have more faith in Political system thereby strengthening the roots of Democracy.

Argument Against

• Life-long punishment may seem disproportionate as candidate guilty of committing even minor crimes like breaking traffic rules, indulging in minor scuffling unlike heinous crimes like rape, murder, terrorism still he/she will be disqualified for life term from contesting elections.

• There may be chances that ruling party leaders may deceitfully frame their rival leaders or genuine political activists/ innocent people to wipe out their opposition.

Way forward
Such a lifelong ban on convicted lawmakers will go a long way in cleansing the Political system of India and serves as a confidence building measure. However care should be taken that such ban happens only for heinous crimes.

1.7.2. MULTI PHASE POLLS

Why in News?
 After polling in 5 states, Chief Election Commissioner of India (CEC) has said that long-drawn-out, multiple-phase elections will continue in near future.
 

Need
 The Constitution provides us with the right to have free and fair elections. Single phase election may be hard to monitor and may lead to unfair election practices.
 

Significance

• Conduct of elections involves elaborate security management, including security of polling personnel, polling stations and polling materials.

  • Multi-phase polls help in overcoming any challenges of manpower shortage related to security.

  • It also improves monitoring and coordination between agencies conducting the election.

• Multi-phase polls also distribute costs of conducting elections over a period of time rather than application of one-time costs thus removing logistical challenges.

• Multi-phase polls reaches maximum amount of voter population preventing occurrence of violence and malpractices in elections.

Criticism

• Many oppose the move as multi-phase polls undermine the authority of State Police in law and order because of the preference given to the Central police forces.

• Multi-phase polls are also considered to be a hindrance to free and fair polling because –

  • Even if election campaigning stops in one area, it still continues in other area due to the Section 126 of ROP Act 1951.

  • This indirectly influences the voter of the other constituencies, thus violating the spirit of the law.

• Model Code of Conduct is extended over a larger period of time in multi-phase poll. This causes hurdles to start new development projects in these poll states.

Way Forward

• Although there are limitations of multi-phase polls, still in the present scenario of limited financial and human resources, the multi-phase poll is a way to remove any logistical challenges to the conduct of free and fair elections.

1.7.3. ELECTION COMMISSION ON ASTROLOGY

• Election Commission (EC) said that Predictions by astrologers, Tarot readers and Political analysts on election results cannot be published or broadcast by the media.

• EC observed such kind of analysis is equivalent Exit polls.

• At present, Exit polls are banned under Representation of People Act, 1951. Such restrictions are in place since 2010 with Introduction of Section 126(A) of RPA, 1951.

1.8. AADHAAR
Why in news?

• The government has made Aadhaar mandatory for filing income tax returns; for obtaining PAN; for availing benefits under Mid-Day Meal; and also for verification of mobile phone connections.

What is Aadhaar?

• Aadhaar is a 12-digit number issued by the UIDAI to the residents of India, however, it does not confer any right of citizenship or domicile in respect of an Aadhaar number holder.

• Any resident, irrespective of age and gender may voluntarily enrol free of cost to obtain Aadhaar.

• Aadhaar is proof of identity, proof of residence and now also financial address for its residents.

• Data collected includes:

  • Demographic information required: Name, Date of Birth, Gender, Address, Parent/Guardian details (required for children, optional for adults),Contact details phone and email (optional)

  • Biometric Information required: Photo, 10 finger prints, Iris

Features and benefits of Aadhaar

• Aadhaar has helped save government more than INR 49,000 crore in subsidies and more than 106 crore people have already been allotted Aadhaar till date.

• One Aadhaar: As it contains biometrics which is unique, it helps in identifying fake and ghost beneficiaries in a government scheme, thereby helping in better targeting and stemming leakages.

• Identification Services: Agencies can check identity of a person online from anywhere in India by requesting UIDAI after obtaining prior consent of the person. This eliminates need of various identity documents required in opening bank accounts etc.

• Blocking Biometrics: Aadhaar card holder gets alerts every time his/her identity is authenticated and can also block biometrics, thus not allowing anyone to access details for identification.

• Marginalized and excluded residents not having sufficient documentation to meet the proof of identity or proof of address will also be issued Aadhaar number by way of “introducer” system.

• Electronic benefit transfers: Aadhaar acts as financial address and thus offers a secure and low cost platform to directly remit benefits to intended beneficiaries.

• Improving Efficiency and Efficacy: Clear accountability and transparent monitoring would significantly improve access and quality of entitlements to beneficiaries and the agency alike.

• Self-service puts residents in control: Using Aadhaar as an authentication mechanism, residents should be able to access up-to-date information about their entitlements, demand services and redress their grievances directly from their mobile phone, kiosks or other means.

Issues with Aadhaar

• Privacy Issues: Right to liberty and freedom of expression is compromised if right to privacy is not there. In the absence of a comprehensive privacy law in India, making Aadhaar mandatory may lead to misuse of personal information and surveillance by the State thus taking away privacy.

• Release of Information: Information of an individual can only be revealed in two cases:

  • On the order of District Court

  • In the case of national security on direction of a “joint secretary” (Section 33(2))

  •  National security is a vague term and these safeguards are weaker than those for telephone tapping as given in Telegraph Act, 1885 which allows sharing of data for public emergency or public safety and second, the order to share information can be issued only by Home Secretary.

• Potential to profile individuals: The Act does not have provisions to protect against determining of behavioural pattern and profiling of a person using big data analytics.

  • It does not prohibit law enforcement agencies from using Aadhaar as a link across various datasets such as telephone records or air travel records

  • It does not prescribe maximum duration for which authentication record of an individual can be maintained.

• Section 57 enables the government to impose Aadhaar identification in virtually any other context that is not mentioned in the bill.

• Cognizance of offence: No court shall take cognizance of any offence except on a complaint made by the UIDAI. Thus, a person who is aggrieved by breach of data has no remedy at his/her disposal.

• Discretionary powers of UIDAI: The Act empowers UIDAI to specify other information that may be collected, without prior approval from Parliament.

• No provision for public or independent Oversight: The Act does not provide for independent oversight or limitations on surveillance.

• Prosecution: The Aadhaar Act does not make UIDAI liable for criminal prosecution in case of breach of data as per Section 43 of the Information Technology Act.

• Compensation: Unlike in western countries, the Act does not have any provision for compensation to the person whose data is compromised.

• Authentication Failure: In addition to wrong inclusion, exclusion of poor households, and misuse of biometric data, failure of biometric authentication stands approximately at 30 % due to connectivity and other issues.

Conclusion

• Aadhaar presents a unique opportunity to improve governance processes and outcomes. It is a strategic policy tool for social and financial inclusion, public sector delivery reforms, managing fiscal budgets, increase convenience and promote hassle-free people-centric governance. It facilitates financial inclusion of the underprivileged and weaker sections of the society and is therefore a tool of distributive justice and equality.