criminalisation of politics essay

Criminalisation of politics: causes, impacts and solutions – Explained, pointwise

ForumIAS announcing GS Foundation Program for UPSC CSE 2025-26 from 19 April. Click Here for more information.

ForumIAS Answer Writing Focus Group (AWFG) for Mains 2024 commencing from 24th June 2024. The Entrance Test for the program will be held on 21st April 2024 at 9 AM. To know more about the program visit: https://forumias.com/blog/awfg2024

1 Introduction
2 A little background of the petition
3 What is criminalisation of politics?
4 What are the recent trends?
5 What are the causes of criminalisation of politics in India?
6 What are the impacts of criminalisation of politics in India?
7 What are the initiatives taken so far to overcome the issue of the criminalisation of politics in India?
8 What are some of the landmark judgements on criminalisation of politics in India?
9 What are the various recommendations on de-criminalization of politics?
10 What should be done?

Introduction

Recently, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) wrote to the Election Commission (ECI), seeking action against political parties that failed to publish details of criminal records of their candidates as per orders of the Supreme Court and the ECI. Activists and independent electoral watchdogs like ADR have been raising concerns over criminalisation of politics for a long time. The increasing trend of criminalisation of politics poses a significant threat to the democratic system.

A little background of the petition

In a petition filed by Public Interest Foundation , the Supreme Court in 2018, made it mandatory for political parties to widely publicize the details of criminal cases pending against their candidates.

Subsequently, in February 2020, while hearing a contempt petition regarding its 2018 order not being implemented, the court repeated that the parties would have to publish the details of candidates with pending criminal cases. It also added that they would have to include the reasons for selecting such a candidate.

However, an analysis of data by the ADR of Karnataka, Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh elections shows that the number of candidates with criminal antecedents has only increased from previous elections.

A petition filed by the ADR in 2022 in the Supreme Court sought contempt proceedings against various political leaders for not complying with earlier Supreme Court orders.

The Supreme Court, earlier in 2023, dismissed the petition and asked ADR to pursue the remedies before the EC. This led ADR to write the letter to ECI.

What is criminalisation of politics?

“Criminalisation of politics” refe rs to the entry of criminals and corrupt individuals into the political system. These individuals then exploit their positions of power and influence to prioritize their personal agendas over the welfare of the nation and its people.

Read more : What is the criminalisation of politics?

What are the recent trends?

Data by the ADR reveals that the number of candidates with criminal charges getting elected to Parliament has been on the rise since 2004.

In 2004, around 24% of Members of Parliament (MPs) had pending criminal cases against them. By 2009, this percentage increased to 30%, followed by a further rise to 34% in 2014. In 2019, as many as 43% of MPs had criminal cases pending against them.

According to a recent report published by ADR, in the recently held Karnataka elections, approximately 45 per cent of the candidates had criminal cases registered against them. Nearly 30 per cent of these candidates were accused of grave offences, including rape and murder.

What are the causes of criminalisation of politics in India?

Attraction of the strongmen : Due to the government’s failure to address the socio-economic and political concerns of the people, they are attracted towards people with a criminal image. These strongmen, who possess both power and wealth, are expected to fulfill the needs of the people.

Vote bank politics: Money and muscle power of criminals help political parties gain votes. Since, in India electoral politics is more about caste, ethnicity, religion and several other factors, candidates overcome the reputational loss due to criminal charges and come out as victorious in elections.

Black money in elections: Electoral politics is largely dependent on the money and the funding that it receives. Since candidates with criminal records often possess greater wealth, they ensure greater inflow in money, labour and other advantages that may help a party in successful campaign, and also possess greater ‘winnability’. Researech suggests that a candidate with a tainted reputation is three times more likely to win an election than a candidate with a clean record.

Lack of Intra-party democracy: Political parties in India largely lack intra-party democracy and the decisions on candidature are largely taken by the elite leadership of the party. Thus, politicians with criminal records often escape the scrutiny by local workers and organisation of the party.

Lack of adequate deterrence: Due to the low levels of convictions of MPs and MLAs, and delays in trials, political parties are not deterred from giving tickets to criminals.

Loopholes in the functioning of Election Commission : The Election Commission has prescribed forms for the contestants of elections to disclose their property details, cases pending in courts, convictions etc. while filing their nomination papers. However, these steps have not been stringent enough to break the nexus between crime and politics.

What are the impacts of criminalisation of politics in India?

Undermines democracy: The foundation of a democracy is the trust between its citizens and those elected to govern on their behalf. When elected representatives have criminal backgrounds, it undermines this trust and erodes the credibility of the democratic system.

Poor governance: Individuals with criminal backgrounds often lack the skills, education, and understanding necessary to govern effectively. Their policies and decisions may be guided by their own personal interests rather than the interests of their constituents.

Cultivates culture of impunity: Criminalisation of politics can foster a culture of impunity where individuals believe they can commit crimes without facing consequences, which can lead to increased crime rates and a general lack of respect for the law.

Encourages corruption: Politicians with criminal backgrounds are more likely to engage in corrupt practices, such as bribery, fraud, and embezzlement, further undermining the legitimacy of the government and public faith in it.

Impact on economic development : The chronic corruption and mismanagement associated with criminal politicians can deter both domestic and foreign investors, stymie economic growth, and exacerbate poverty and inequality.

Hampers social development: With corruption and self-interest driving policymaking, social development initiatives, such as health, education, and welfare programs, can be severely compromised, preventing the upliftment of disadvantaged groups.

Taints international reputation: The criminalisation of politics can damage India’s reputation on the international stage, making it more difficult to engage in beneficial relationships with other countries and international organizations.

What are the initiatives taken so far to overcome the issue of the criminalisation of politics in India?

Constitutional initiative: Articles 84 and 173 deal with eligibility, whereas articles 102 and 191 deal with the disqualification of the House of Parliament and state legislative assemblies respectively.

Legislative initiative: Indian Penal Code: Chapter IX A of Indian Penal Code deals with offences relating to elections . There are nine portions in it. For crimes like bribery, improper influence, and impersonation during elections, it defines them and lays forth the associated penalties.

Representation of People Act (RPA), 1951: Section 8 of the Act lists certain offences which, if a person is convicted of any of them, disqualifies him from being elected, or continuing as, a Member of Parliament or Legislative Assembly.

A candidate for any National or State Assembly elections is required to furnish an affidavit, in the shape of Form 26 appended to the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 . Failure to furnish this information, concealment of information or giving of false information is an offence under Section125A of the RPA . 

What are some of the landmark judgements on criminalisation of politics in India?

In Union of India (UOI) v. Association for Democratic Reforms and Anr, 2002 , the SC held that every candidate, contesting an election to the Parliament, State Legislatures or Municipal Corporation, must declare their criminal records, financial records and educational qualifications along with their nomination paper.

In Ramesh Dalal vs. Union of India, 2005 , the SC held that a sitting MP or MLA shall also be subject to disqualification from contesting elections if he is convicted and sentenced to not less than 2 years of imprisonment by a court of law.

The SC in  Public Interest Foundation vs Union of India case , 2018 had also directed political parties to publish online the pending criminal cases of their candidates. In this case, the court left the matter of disqualification of politicians carrying criminal charges against them to Parliament saying that the court cannot add to the grounds of disqualification.

Order to establish Special Courts: Accordingly, the Union Government facilitated setting up of 12 Special Courts in States which had 65 and above pending cases, for expeditious trial of criminal cases involving MP/MLAs. Accordingly , 12 Special Courts (02 in NCT of Delhi and 01 each in the state of UP, Bihar, WB, MP, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Tamil Nadu and Kerala) were constituted. Performance of these special courts is being monitored by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

What are the various recommendations on de-criminalization of politics?

Read here: Important Recommendations

What should be done?

Legal reforms: The laws concerning the disqualification of candidates with criminal backgrounds need to be strengthened. For instance , 2nd ARC recommended amending section 8 of RPA to disqualify all persons facing charges related to grave and heinous offences and corruption, where charges have been framed six months before the election .

Time-bound justice delivery system: Fast tracking trials and expediting the judicial process through a time-bound justice delivery system will weed out the corrupt as well as criminal elements in the political system.

Pressure on political parties: P ressure must be exerted on political parties to make them accountable for their choices. Political parties must realise that they must follow the rule of law and that they are not above the law.

Strict enforcement of directives: The ECI needs to strictly enforce the directives of the Supreme Court. Parties that do not comply with these directives should face penalties, including fines, as suggested by the ADR. In extreme cases, non-compliant parties could be deregistered.

Internal democracy in political parties: Encouraging internal democracy within political parties can also help. When party members have a say in candidate selection, they are more likely to choose individuals of integrity.

Implementing recommendations of various committees: The recommendations of several committees, such as the Vohra Committee (1993) and Goswami Committee and law commission report (170 and 244 th), which have focused on tackling the criminalisation of politics, need to be fully implemented.

Use of technology: Technology can be harnessed to ensure speedy trials and provide easy access to information about candidates. For instance, online platforms could be used to maintain a publicly accessible database of the criminal records of all political candidates.

Sources : ADR , Indian Express ( Article1 , Article2 ), Department of Justice , Free Press Journal , SCO

Type your email…

Search Articles

Prelims 2024 Current Affairs

Art and Culture
Indian Economy
Science and Technology
Environment & Ecology
International Relations
Polity & Nation
Important Bills and Acts
International Organizations
Index, Reports and Summits
Government Schemes and Programs
Miscellaneous
Species in news

Criminalization of Politics in India: Causes, Effects, Measures

From Current Affairs Notes for UPSC » Editorials & In-depths » This topic

* Updates at the bottom

The rising percentage of members of parliament who have a criminal background: 2004 – 24%, 2009 – 30%, 2014 – 34% and 2019 -43%. Around 50% of MPs in the new Lok Sabha have criminal records. This increasing number of members with criminal records in parliament endangers the survival of any true democracy. In this article, you will learn everything about the criminalisation of politics viz- what, why, causes, consequences, measures, challenges, solutions, and also the verdict of SC regarding criminal politics.

This topic of “Criminalization of Politics in India: Causes, Effects, Measures” is important from the perspective of the UPSC IAS Examination , which falls under General Studies Portion.

What is the Criminalisation of Politics?

The criminalisation of politics refers to the increasing participation of criminals in the electoral process and selection of the same as elected representatives of the people.

Express Learning Programme (ELP)

Optional Notes
Study Hacks
Prelims Sureshots (Repeated Topic Compilations)
Current Affairs (Newsbits, Editorials & In-depths)
Ancient Indian History
Medieval Indian History
Modern Indian History
Post-Independence Indian History
World History
Art & Culture
Geography (World & Indian)
Indian Society & Social Justice
Indian Polity
International Relations
Indian Economy
Environment
Agriculture
Internal Security
Disasters & its Management
General Science – Biology
General Studies (GS) 4 – Ethics
Syllabus-wise learning
Political Science
Anthropology
Public Administration

What is the status of Criminal Politics in India?

The criminalisation of politics is one of the primary concerns in India as many politicians facing charges of murder, corruption , abduction, and rape continue to be legislators.
Around 1/3 rd the members of the current parliament have criminal cases filed against them.
Data suggests that voters don’t mind electing candidates facing criminal cases.

Prelims Sureshots – Most Probable Topics for UPSC Prelims

A Compilation of the Most Probable Topics for UPSC Prelims, including Schemes, Freedom Fighters, Judgments, Acts, National Parks, Government Agencies, Space Missions, and more. Get a guaranteed 120+ marks!

How did Indian politics become criminalized?

Muscle power:.

Muscle power has been ingrained into Indian politics for a very long time.
Many politicians are thriving today based on muscle power provided by criminals.
Such politicians chose muscle power in order to gain a vote bank in the country.

Money Power:

It is a well-accepted fact that huge election costs are the major cause of corruption in India.
A candidate spends lakhs of rupees to get elected and even if he gets elected, the total salary he gets during his term as a legislator will be meager compared to his election expenses.
However, criminal activities help in generating a huge amount of money to fund the elections.

Loopholes in the functioning of elections:

The voters are generally not aware of the history of the candidate, qualifications, and cases pending against him.

Weak Judicial System & Denial of Justice:

A huge pile of cases is pending in District courts, High Courts, and Supreme Court against these criminal cum politicians.

Why criminal politics is a grave concern?

It reveals the low ethical and moral values of our legislators which leads to the enactment of arbitrary and discriminatory laws.
Misusing executives for personal gains and undermining the law of the land.
The quality of candidates contesting elections is important for better governance.
Loss of public faith in the government as well as judiciary since courts failed to contain it.
It affects the efficiency of legislatures leading to poor governance.

What are the measures taken?

The Supreme Court and Election Commission of India (ECI) have taken some commendable measures to reform the electoral process as follows.

ECI’s reforms

ECI has achieved substantial success in controlling the role of muscle power via measures like the effective implementation of the model code of conduct and also established the Expense Monitoring Cell.
Mandatory declaration of assets and existing criminal charges in self-sworn affidavits to the ECI prior to elections has brought in some transparency.

The Supreme Court’s verdicts

Criminal records
Financial records
Educational qualifications

If the candidate fails to file any of the above three declarations, the Returning Officer will have the right to reject his nomination papers. SC ruled that all three declarations will have to be truthful.

SC in (Lily Thomas Vs Union of India 2013) declared that upon conviction, charge-sheeted MPs and MLAs would be disqualified with immediate effect from holding membership of the house, without being given 3 months to appeal.
SC in 2014 accepted the Law Commission recommendations and passed an order directing that trials against sitting MPs and MLAs should be concluded within a year of charges being framed and conducted on a day-to-day basis.
Some other attempts by the judiciary: prohibiting those in jail from contesting elections, directing the EC to bring the issue of election-related freebies under the ambit of the Code of Conduct, the Allahabad High Court banning caste, and religion-based political rallies.
Recent SC verdict: The judgement was given over the much-awaited pronouncement on the petitions asking it to prohibit politicians facing the heinous criminal charges against rape, murder, and kidnapping from contesting elections.

Centre’s measures

In 2017, the Union government started a scheme to establish 12 special courts for a year to fast-track the trial of criminal cases against 1,581 MPs and MLAs.

How effective were those measures?

Debarring of politicians has no effect since rates of conviction are too low and trials themselves are subject to long delays as showcased by a recent Law Commission report.
Many politicians are filing false affidavits about their annual income, wealth details.
About 90% of cases transferred to the special courts set up under the Centre’s scheme are pending as of now.

What are the key features of the SC verdict on Criminal Politics?

Political parties.

SC’s Observation – The rapid criminalization of politics cannot be solved through the mere disqualification of criminal legislators. Cleaning politics from criminal elements starts only by means of purifying political parties themselves. Since political parties are the major institution of Indian democracy, they play an important role in the interface between private citizens and the government. They act as a medium through which interests and problems of the people are showcased in Parliament.
SC’s verdict – The Supreme Court ordered the political parties to publish the pending criminal cases of their candidates online.
It asked the Parliament to create a strong law in order to cleanse political parties of leaders facing trials for serious crimes.
Such a law should make it mandatory for political parties to remove leaders accused of “heinous and grievous” crimes.
Parties must reject tickets to criminal elements in both parliamentary and Assembly polls.
The Bench also made it clear that the court cannot make law for Parliament by providing disqualification to prohibit such candidates from contesting elections.
SC declared that the candidates should disclose their criminal cases against them to the Election Commission in BLOCK LETTERS as well as to their respective political parties.
The parties, in turn, should publish the full details of their candidate on their websites for public view.

What are the concerns with the judgement?

The SC has passed the burden to the ECI, although the ECI has been asking for the apex court’s aid for the past two decades.
Parliament is required to make a law on the matter as per Article 101 (1) of the constitution, however, Parliament regardless of who is in power has always been reluctant to legislate on the issue.
The bench pronounced that it is not in a position to enable disqualification of candidates who face criminal charges thus withdrawing from its responsibility to solve the issue.
Voters do not generally read the websites of political parties.
The recommendation regarding the publicity campaigns about the criminal background of candidates by political parties sounds unreasonable.
The definition of heinous crimes may change as per times and societal conditions.

What more could be done?

A law to prohibit candidates who are charged with heinous crimes will need a broad consensus across the party lines.
More fast-track courts to try the cases dealing with serious charges against the candidates.
To reduce money power,
To create a level playing field,
To enable public-spirited people to contest elections thereby ensuring equality of opportunities,
To break the political-corporate nexus thereby ending rent-seeking and crony capitalism.
To change the election’s focus towards people’s problems rather than on raising funds through illegitimate means, i.e., focus on development politics.
Stricter implementation of anti-corruption laws.
Transparency and audit mechanisms.
Representation of Peoples Act (RPA) needs to be amended and there should be stricter actions against serious offenders.
Election Commission should be given more power to deal with corruption cases.
Inner party democracy needs to be improved.

Supreme Court has done its part in decriminalizing Indian politics. But SC or Election Commission cannot decriminalize politics single-handed since they require support from Legislation too. Hence it is in the hands of the Parliament to frame a law that decriminalizes Indian politics effectively.

In the words of Dr. Rajendra Prasad , “A constitution like a machine is a lifeless thing. It acquires life because of the men who control it and operate it”. Therefore good and quality politicians are needed for India to become a vibrant democracy through good governance .

Practice Question:

The criminalization of politics is a disease that poses a grave threat to our democracy if left unchecked. Discuss the initiatives taken to check criminal politics and examine the effectiveness of those initiatives.
April 25, 2023: The killing of Atiq Ahmed , a notorious criminal turned politician in India, highlighted the issue of criminalization of politics in the country. Nearly 40% of the current Indian Parliament members have criminal cases pending against them, with many not feeling threatened due to the slow pace of trials.

GET MONTHLY COMPILATIONS

Ayodhya-Babri Dispute: Timeline, SC Verdict & its Significance

India’s Ancient Republics

GM Crops in India – Pros & Cons

Holistic article,great job??

There was a problem reporting this post.

Block Member?

Please confirm you want to block this member.

You will no longer be able to:

See blocked member's posts
Mention this member in posts

Please allow a few minutes for this process to complete.

Back to Faculty Bibliography

Alan Dershowitz , Trumped Up: How Criminalization of Political Differences Endangers Democracy (2017).

Abstract: In our current age of hyper-partisan politics, nearly everyone takes sides. This is especially true with regard to the Trump presidency. It has become difficult to have a reasonable discussion about the most controversial president in our recent history. For Trump zealots, their president has not only committed no crimes, he has done nothing wrong. For anti-Trump zealots, nothing Trump has done—even in foreign policy—is good. Everything he has done is wrong, and since it is wrong, it must necessarily be criminal. This deeply undemocratic fallacy—that political sins must be investigated and prosecuted as criminal—is an exceedingly dangerous trend. Hardening positions on both sides has been manifested by increasing demands to criminalize political differences. Both sides scream “lock ‘em up” instead of making substantive criticisms of opposing views. The real fear, as Alan Dershowitz argues, in this compelling collection, is that we have weakened our national commitment to civil liberties as the Left becomes ever more intolerant and the Right slips into authoritarian rhetoric. The vibrant center is weakening, with traditional liberalism and conservatism becoming further apart, not just in approach, but in their respect for Constitutional norms that have served us well for more than two centuries. While Donald Trump is not the only cause of this profound division, his election drew it to the surface and made it the dominant paradigm of political debate. Unless we as a nation begin to focus again on what unites us rather than on what divides us, America might not survive the next decade.

Share full article

Supported by

Op-Ed Contributor

When Politics Is Criminalized

By Alan M. Dershowitz

Nov. 28, 2017

We are surrounded on all sides by news of criminal investigations into politicians. Robert Mueller, the special counsel, has obtained an indictment relating to his investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Congressional committees are also investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 election. House Republicans have announced plans to look into the Obama administration’s handling of Hillary Clinton’s emails and its decision to give a Russian-controlled company, Uranium One, control of some American uranium reserves. Now the Justice Department is considering whether to appoint a special counsel in the uranium deal.

Government corruption should be prosecuted, Congress has a role to play in overseeing the executive branch, and our intelligence agencies are right to raise concerns about foreign interference in our elections. But there is something worrisome about the current frenzy of criminal investigations. To me they point to a frightening trend that afflicts both Democrats and Republicans: the criminalization of political differences.

The framers of our Constitution did not seek to make it easy to convict Americans of crimes. They bestowed upon criminal defendants a bundle of rights to provide safeguards against overzealous prosecutors or legislators, including prohibitions against compelled self-incrimination, unreasonable searches, double jeopardy and the passage of laws declaring people guilty of acts that were not criminal when committed.

Our legal system also came to require proof beyond a reasonable doubt, a unanimous jury and clear statutes that differentiate between criminal and noncriminal conduct. No wonder Benjamin Franklin described our system as preferring that “a hundred guilty persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer.”

To be sure, these barriers to over-criminalization were sometimes more theoretical than practical when it came to political crimes. John Adams presided over an administration that imprisoned political opponents under the Alien and Sedition Acts . Thomas Jefferson went after his political opponents, especially Aaron Burr, with a vengeance, personally directing Burr’s unsuccessful prosecution for treason.

Over time, though, the country’s judicial standards and rigorous protections for the accused made the jailing of political enemies difficult, maintaining a crucial bulwark against autocracy. But that bulwark has eroded, largely because of a new approach: the use of politically neutral but overly malleable laws on obstruction of justice, corruption and conspiracy that can be used to prosecute the ethically questionable, but not necessarily criminal, activities of political rivals.

Both sides deploy this tactic. We have seen it used against Republicans, including the former representative Tom DeLay, whose conviction on corruption charges was overturned after he was forced from office, and the former senator Ted Stevens, whose conviction on failing to report gifts was later voided — after he had lost his re-election bid. The Republican National Committee waged a media war to get Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, to resign if a jury were to convict him on corruption charges so that the Republican governor of New Jersey could replace him before he leaves office early next year. (The case ended in mistrial when a jury could not reach a verdict.)

I raise this alarm as a loyal liberal who has supported every Democratic candidate for president since I campaigned for Adlai Stevenson in 1952. Yet because of my strong opposition to open-ended criminal laws, some critics on the left have accused me of becoming “President Trump’s attack dog.” Nothing could be further from the truth. I worked to prevent the election of Donald Trump, and since his swearing in, I have been critical of many of his actions, including his travel ban, his rescission of protections for “Dreamers,” his telling the Russians about intelligence gathering and his failure to single out white nationalists for their provocations in Charlottesville.

But elastic criminal laws should not be stretched to cover Mr. Trump’s exercise of his constitutionally authorized power. When the president asked the director of the F.B.I. to drop its investigation into Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, or fired James Comey from the F.B.I., or provided classified information to the Russians, he was acting within his constitutional powers. Those actions may deserve opprobrium, but they should not be deemed criminal. The proper place to litigate the wisdom of such actions should be at the ballot box, not in the jury box.

Even if it were to turn out that the Trump campaign collaborated, colluded or cooperated with Russian agents, that alone would not be a crime, unless the campaign asked them or helped them to commit criminal acts such as hacking.

Today the target for politically tinged investigations is Donald Trump and his campaign. Last year (and again today) it was Hillary Clinton — as it was her husband before her. Next up are Bernie Sanders and his wife, who are being investigated at the behest of a Republican Party official in Vermont.

An overly flexible, easily expanded criminal statute is a loaded weapon capable of being fired by zealous prosecutors at almost any target. It’s time to store the weapon until it is really needed — and not the next time someone wants to wound his political enemies.

Alan M. Dershowitz, professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, is the author of “Trumped Up: How Criminalization of Political Differences Endangers Democracy.”

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion) , and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter .

Criminalization of Politics | UPSC Mains Essay Preparation PDF Download

To write an effective UPSC essay on "Criminalization of Politics," it is crucial to structure it with a clear introduction, body, and conclusion. Here is a proposed structure for the essay, followed by the essay itself:

Introduction

Start with a quote or phrase to set the tone.
Briefly define criminalization of politics.
Introduce the current scenario or a recent case study (e.g., the ADR report on Karnataka's 2023 Assembly Elections).
Discuss statistics and trends (e.g., ADR data, increase in criminal cases in Parliament).
Analyze various factors contributing to this issue (Vote bank politics, corruption, vested interests, muscle and money power, poor governance).
Discuss how it impacts democracy, governance, public service integrity, and social harmony.
Overview of the legal framework (Representation of Peoples Act, Supreme Court Judgments).
Discuss existing recommendations and initiatives against criminalization (Vohra Committee, Law Commission, Special Courts).
Suggest reforms (More power to ECI, voter awareness, expeditious judicial processes, amending RPA).
Reinforce the urgency of addressing criminalization in politics.
End with a forward-looking statement or quote that reflects a positive attitude towards change.

Sample Essay

The following essay serves as a sample for the given topic. Students can add their own ideas and points as well.

"Democracy must be built through open societies that share information. When there is information, there is enlightenment. When there is debate, there are solutions." - Atifete Jahjaga

The dark shadow of criminalization has been looming over the Indian political landscape, challenging the very essence of our democratic fabric. This phenomenon, where individuals with criminal backgrounds participate in governance, has increasingly become a critical concern. A recent report by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) on the Karnataka 2023 Assembly Elections underscores this alarming trend, where the number of candidates with criminal cases has escalated across major political parties.

The Nature and Extent of Criminalization in Indian Politics

The ADR's statistics paint a grim picture: the proportion of parliamentarians with pending criminal cases has risen sharply from 24% in 2004 to 43% in 2019. A staggering 44% increase in MPs with declared criminal cases since 2009, including serious charges like rape and murder, signals a deep-rooted problem.

Causes of Criminalization

Several factors contribute to this malaise. The manipulation of vote banks through illegal means and the use of "goondas" for political gains reflect a disturbing confluence of crime and politics. Corruption plays a pivotal role, as electoral contests demand substantial financial resources, often sourced through unscrupulous means. The electorate's tendency to vote based on narrow community interests, overlooking candidates' criminal backgrounds, further exacerbates the issue. The muscle and money power used to instill fear and buy votes, coupled with poor governance and lax election laws, create a fertile ground for criminal elements to flourish in politics.

Implications of Criminalization

The consequences are far-reaching. The principle of free and fair elections, a cornerstone of democracy, is compromised. It hampers good governance, as law-breakers become law-makers, eroding the effectiveness of democratic processes. The proliferation of black money and corrupt practices undermines the integrity of public servants and erodes public trust in governance. Moreover, it breeds a culture of violence and sets a negative precedent for the youth, disrupting social harmony.

Legal and Judicial Responses

The legal framework, primarily the Representation of Peoples Act 1951, stipulates disqualification for certain offenses. However, it falls short of barring individuals with pending criminal cases. Supreme Court judgments have attempted to curb this trend. Landmark rulings like the Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2002) and Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013) have mandated disclosure of criminal and financial records and disqualified convicted MPs/MLAs. Despite these measures, the effectiveness in curbing criminalization remains questionable.

Solutions and Way Forward

Empowering the Election Commission of India (ECI) with more authority can be a significant step in mitigating this issue. Voter education and vigilance against electoral malpractices are imperative. Fast-tracking judicial processes and establishing special courts can expedite the resolution of criminal cases against politicians. Furthermore, amending the Representation of Peoples Act to disqualify candidates with serious criminal charges, even if pending, can act as a strong deterrent.

The criminalization of politics is not just a political issue but a societal one that demands urgent and collective action. As former President APJ Abdul Kalam aptly said, "If a country is to be corruption free and become a nation of beautiful minds, I strongly feel there are three key societal members who can make a difference. They are the father, the mother, and the teacher." Thus, it is the responsibility of every citizen, from the family unit to the highest echelons of power, to strive towards purging our political system of criminal elements, thereby safeguarding the sanctity of our democracy and ensuring a brighter future for India.

Top Courses for UPSC

Faqs on criminalization of politics - upsc mains essay preparation, how to prepare for upsc, previous year questions with solutions, extra questions, important questions, sample paper, past year papers, video lectures, study material, mock tests for examination, objective type questions, viva questions, shortcuts and tricks, criminalization of politics | upsc mains essay preparation, semester notes, practice quizzes.

Criminalization of Politics Free PDF Download

Importance of criminalization of politics, criminalization of politics notes, criminalization of politics upsc questions, study criminalization of politics on the app, welcome back, create your account for free.

Forgot Password

Unattempted tests, change country.

General Studies

All Programmes

Study Material

Criminalization of Politics

Quest for upsc cse panels.

Sub-Categories:

GS-II: Governance

What is ‘criminalization of politics’ and its status in India?

What are the reasons for the criminalization of politics in India?

What are the legal and constitutional tools to deal with the criminalization of politics in india, what are the outcomes of criminalization of the indian political landscape, what are the various measures taken to deal with the issue of criminalization of politics in india, what are the ways to decriminalize indian politics.

Prelims: Indian Polity and Governance – Constitution, Political System, Panchayati Raj, Public Policy, Rights Issues, etc.

Mains : Salient Features of the Representation of People’s Act, Appointment to various Constitutional Posts, Powers, Functions and Responsibilities of various Constitutional Bodies.

What is ‘criminalization of politics’ and its status in India?

In India, the Criminalization of politics has become a growing concern, with a significant number of elected officials facing criminal charges. This has led to public distrust in the political system and the perception that politicians use their power to evade the law.

The criminalization of politics refers to the involvement of individuals with a criminal record in the political arena. This can involve criminals running for and be elected to positions in Parliament and State Legislatures. It often occurs due to the close relationship between politicians and criminal elements.

Association of Democratic Reforms(ADR) report reveals that in the 2014 General Elections for the 16th Lok Sabha, 186 (34%) out of the 541 winners had criminal cases filed against them. This is a jump from the numbers for the 2009 elections, when, out of the 521 winners, 158 (30%) had declared criminal cases.

There are several factors contributing to the criminalization of the political landscape in India:

Muscle power: For winnability, Political parties can even hire or nominate criminals as candidates because of their influence. Many politicians chose muscle power to gain a vote bank in the country.
Money power: Political parties and candidates use the money generated by criminal activities to influence voters, secure their support, and win elections. There also exists a quid pro quo between politicians and criminals to exchange favours or benefits.
Loopholes in the functioning of the election machinery: The voters are not usually aware of the history of the candidate, qualifications, and cases pending against him.
Ineffective judicial system & delayed justice: The thousands and thousands of cases are pending in District Courts, High Courts, and Supreme Court against these criminals cum politicians.
Lack of enforcement: Several laws and court judgments have not helped much due to the lack of enforcement of laws and judgments.
Vested interests: Publishing the criminal history of candidates fielded by political parties may be ineffective, as a major chunk of voters tend to vote through a narrow prism of community interests like caste or religion.
Politico-criminal nexus: This nexus between politicians and criminals, such as organized crime syndicates, drug cartels, etc, helps to advance their own interests or to gain power and influence.
Indian Constitution does not specify what disqualifies a person from contesting elections for the Parliament, Legislative assembly, or any other legislature.
In the present scenario, under the Representation of Peoples (RP) Act 1951, lawmakers cannot contest elections only after their conviction in a criminal case.
Section 8 of the act, i.e., disqualification on conviction for certain offenses, according to which an individual punished with a jail term of more than two years cannot stand in an election for six years after the jail term has ended.
The Election Commission of India, under the Representation of the People Act 1951, can remove or reduce the period of a person’s disqualification.

The criminalization of politics can have negative effects on democracy and the rule of law. It creates an environment where politicians and political parties engage in corrupt practices and undermines the trust of citizens in the political system.

Impediment to Development: Criminalization of politics can act as an impediment to development, as politicians with criminal backgrounds may prioritize their own interests over the welfare of the people.
Weakening of Democratic Institutions: The presence of criminals in politics can also weaken democratic institutions, as they may try to manipulate the system to their advantage.
Impact on the Principle of Free and Fair Election: Criminalization of Politics goes against the principles of a free and fair election by limiting the options for voters to choose a deserving candidate.
Impairing Good Governance : The issue of criminal elements becoming elected officials undermines the democratic process and hampers the delivery of good governance.
Affecting Integrity of Public Servants: It also leads to increased circulation of black money during and after elections, which in turn increases corruption in society and affects the working of public servants.
Causes Social Disharmony: It introduces a culture of violence in society and sets a bad precedent for the youth to follow, and reduces people's faith in democracy as a system of governance.
Erodes Public Trust: Criminalization of politics erodes the public confidence in elected politicians who indulge in criminal activities.

Supreme Court

Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (2002): Supreme Court issued an order directing every candidate seeking election to the Parliament or a State Legislature to declare the criminal antecedents, assets, etc.
Immediate Disqualification of Convicted MPs and MLAs: The Supreme Court, in Lily Thomas case(2013) , held that charge-sheeted Members of Parliament and MLAs, on conviction for offenses, will be immediately disqualified from holding membership of the House without being given three months’ time for appeal, as was the case before.
Fast Track Trial: The Supreme Court in March 2014 accepted the recommendations of the Law Commission and passed an order directing that trials against sitting MPs and MLAs must be concluded within a year of charges being framed.
Public Interest Foundation v. Union of India (2019): In this case, the Supreme Court of India ordered political parties to publish the criminal records of their candidates on their websites, social media handles, and newspapers.

Election Commission of India

Booth Capturing: In 1989, a provision was made for the adjournment of polls or countermanding elections in case of booth capturing. Booth capturing includes seizure and taking possession of polling stations, threatening and preventing any elector from going to polling stations.
Prohibition of Arms: Entering into the neighbourhood of a polling station with any kind of arms is considered a cognizable offense.
Curbing Muscle Power: The ECI has achieved considerable success in containing the role of muscle power through measures such as the effective implementation of the model code of conduct.
Model Code of Conduct(MCC): The Model Code of Conduct is implemented by the Election Commission, from time to time, by using its constitutional powers under Article 324.
Affidavits: Mandatory declaration of assets and existing criminal charges in affidavits to the ECI prior to elections has brought in some transparency.
Strict Legal Provisions like Lifetime Ban: The election commission endorsed the call for a lifetime ban in the apex court. It had argued that such a move would “champion the cause of decriminalization of politics”.
Proactive Judiciary: Given the reluctance by the political parties to curb the criminalization of politics and its growing detrimental effects on Indian democracy, Indian courts must now seriously consider banning people accused of serious criminal charges from contesting elections.
Active Citizenry: Voters should also be aware of the potential to misuse funds, gifts, and other incentives during elections.
State Funding of Elections: Various committees, such as Dinesh Goswami(1990) and Inderjeet Committee(1988), on the electoral reforms, have recommended state funding of elections which will curb the use of black money to a large extent and thereby will have a significant impact on limiting criminalization of politics.
Strengthening Election Commission: Regulating the affairs of a political party is essential for a cleaner electoral process. Therefore, it is imperative to strengthen the Election Commission of India and ensure its independence.

Previous Year Questions(PYQs)

Q) Consider the following statements: (2020)

According to the Constitution of India, a person who is eligible to vote can be made a minister in a State for six months even if he/she is not a member of the Legislature of that State.
According to the Representation of People Act, 1951, a person convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to imprisonment for five years is permanently disqualified from contesting an election even after his release from prison.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Frequently Asked Questions(FAQs)

Q) is model code of conduct enforceable through law.

No, Model Code of Conduct is not enforceable through any law. However, the Election Commission can take action by using its wide powers under Article 324.

Q) Can a person, who is convicted, contest the elections after completing his/her sentence?

According to Representation of People’s 1951, Individuals punished with a jail term of more than two years cannot stand in an election for six years after the jail term has ended. The Election Commission has endorsed multiple times for lifetime ban for the convicted person.

Criminalization of Politics

Recently, the Indian Supreme Court published some necessary mandates to avert the criminalisation of politics as many lawsuits have been withdrawn against MPs ( Members of Parliament ) and MLAs (Members of Legislative Assembly) in the past. So to curb this, the Apex court in India declared that a criminal lawsuit against a Member of Parliament or Member of Legislative Assembly can get withdrawn merely after obtaining the approval of the State High Court involved.

In another instance, the Supreme Court published a few measures to eliminate the criminalisation from lawmakers. Keep reading the article below to know more about the criminalisation of politics UPSC concepts that can help you better prepare for your upcoming IAS exam.

Learn about major 25 Important Supreme Court Judgements for UPSC and related notes in the linked article.

What do we mean by the criminalisation of politics?

The criminalisation of politics implies the increasing involvement of criminals and individuals with criminal charges in Indian politics. In addition, this term means people coming from criminal backgrounds and becoming politicians and elected delegates.

Furthermore, as per Section 8 of the Indian Representative of People Act, any individual imprisoned for a term of more than 2 years cannot file as a candidate in elections until 6 years of his release from jail. However, due to the prevailing criminalisation of politics in India, this provision is not effective in practical life.

Understanding the Causes of Criminalisation in Politics

The most significant cause of the criminalisation of politics is the profane relationship between bureaucracy and politicians.

This unwanted and destructive connection between bureaucracy and political managers increased the scope of the criminalisation of politics. Religion and caste are both accountable for the criminalisation of politics. Also, in bureaucracy, there are specific approaches and regulations for promotion. However, religion and caste both meddle in this procedure, and in numerous Indian states, less competent people get a chance to serve as public servants and in politics.

Also, refer to the following links:

What are Some Reasons for the Criminalisation of Politics in India?

Here are some of the top reasons for the criminalisation of politics in India.

The political parties have massive expenses for elections and other pursuits to get higher votes and gain power. In addition, a politician’s connection with the constituency delivers a suitable climate to political corruption and criminality.

Corruption further plays a crucial role in fostering the criminalisation of politics. By bribing people from a criminal background, one can corrupt the entire system to gain power and political dominance.

Lack of governance

In our country, at the time of contesting elections, there is usually a lack of governance. In addition, given this lack of governance, there is usually no true plan, and no one follows proper procedures set for fighting fair elections.

Narrow Self-interests

Publicising the complete criminal history of election nominees fielded by different political parties may not be reasonable. A significant group of Indian voters tends to vote through a constrained lens of society interests like religion or caste.

What are some Consequences of the Criminalisation of Politics?

Below are some repercussions of the criminalisation of politics.

The existence of individuals with criminal backgrounds in Indian politics and the nation’s law-making holds adverse consequences on the quality of the country’s democracy.
Tremendous portions of unlawful funds pour into the electoral cycle due to comprehensive connections with the unlawful underworld.
The criminalisation of Indian politics holds the effect of restricting the procedure of righteousness and causing further uncertainties in trials.
Offenders entering Indian politics further boosts crime in public life. It negatively affects the state organisations, including the executive, bureaucracy, legislature, and courts.
The criminalisation of politics presents a culture of violence in the community and exemplifies the youth.

In a nutshell, the criminalisation of politics and corruption is striking at the origins of democracy. Therefore, it is high time that the Indian Parliament takes measures urgently to restrain this risk.

Kickstart your UPSC 2023 Preparation today!

For the best preparation strategy for competitive exams candidates can visit the linked article and get detailed study material and preparation tips to excel in the examination.

Frequently Asked Questions on Criminalization of Politics

What do we mean by the criminalisation of politics in india.

The criminalisation of politics in India is the increased involvement of criminals and individuals with criminal charges entering politics.

How do I study the topic of criminalisation of politics?

You can refer to the points above and go through detailed online notes to clear your concepts for this topic.

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

"प्रजा ही प्रभु है"
"No Office in this land is more important than that of being a citizen - Felix Frankfurter"

Criminalisation of Politics: A Grave Threat to Democracy

The infiltration of criminals into politics has become a growing concern, raising serious questions about the integrity of democratic processes. The criminalisation of politics, with candidates charged with heinous offences holding positions of power, has cast a shadow on governance, accountability, and the people's trust, writes Diksha Puri.

Recently, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), an advocacy group focused on electoral reforms, wrote a letter to the Election Commission of India (ECI) urging the Commission to take action against political parties that have failed to disclose the criminal backgrounds of candidates they have nominated in various assembly elections conducted in recent years.

Prof. Trilochan Sastry, Founder and Trustee of Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) speaks on criminalisation of politics

Based on the Supreme Court’s directives on September 25, 2018, and February 13, 2020, political parties have been instructed to disclose the criminal histories of candidates contesting elections. They are also required to provide reasons for nominating these candidates, regardless of their perceived chances of winning. The ECI has further issued a directive to ensure the implementation of the court’s orders regarding the declaration of candidates’ criminal backgrounds. However, despite multiple reminders, several political parties in India persistently neglect to fulfil these obligations of public disclosure.

“Electoral reforms have been at the forefront of ADR’s commitment. We have been doing many surveys on criminal politicians, and we ensure that this information is readily available to the public. The time has come for the Election Commission of India to take decisive action against political parties that willfully defy the directives of both the Supreme Court and the ECI. Individuals engaged in criminal activities are ill-suited for governance as their focus remains fixated on their unlawful pursuits. Consequently, corruption thrives, public services deteriorate, roads suffer, government schools falter, and public healthcare centres operate inefficiently. These criminals prioritise self-interest over serving the people. Hence, those genuinely dedicated to public service must be given tickets by political parties to contest in elections, but there is no political will to make this a reality,” states Prof. Trilochan Sastry, Founder and Trustee of ADR.

According to Professor Sastry, the voters need to be well-informed about the serious criminal cases linked to the candidates they are considering supporting. He suggests that if voters were provided with comprehensive details of these criminal cases right at the polling booth before they cast their votes, it could have a significant impact on the electoral outcomes. By making such information readily available, many candidates with criminal backgrounds may lose public trust and support.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, who previously represented the Election Commission in a case pertaining to the criminalisation of politics, says there are huge complexities surrounding the matter. He emphasises that the responsibility should lie with political parties not to nominate candidates with criminal backgrounds. In an interview with The Probe, Vikas Singh, who also serves as the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), notes that the political class is employing manipulative tactics in an attempt to undermine the directives of the apex court.

“The Supreme Court’s directive was clear – the criminal backgrounds of candidates given tickets by political parties should be made public on the website. However, this measure proved ineffective as criminals contested and even won elections. Recognising the need for a more robust solution, I proposed that pressure be exerted on political parties, making them accountable for their choices. It was crucial to question why they were granting tickets to criminals instead of individuals with good reputations. Unfortunately, political parties started circumventing the directive of the Supreme Court by adopting a standard defence tactic, claiming false cases were foisted against the candidates nominated by them. They started presenting these criminal candidates as social workers. In each case, they began using this generic one-liner defence without examining the merits of the case. As a result, the Supreme Court’s order was defeated,” explains Singh.

Singh questions, “Why should politicians be given special powers? Can a charge-sheeted person become an IAS officer? Can he hold any civil services posts? Then why should politicians be given this unfair privilege which goes against the very spirit of our democracy? In this case, the change can only be brought in by the Parliament. The Election Commission has been turned into a toothless body. Only political will can bring about change”.

According to a recent report published by ADR, approximately 45 per cent of the candidates from Congress, BJP, and JD(S) who participated in the recently held Karnataka elections had criminal cases registered against them. Alarmingly, nearly 30 per cent of these candidates were accused of grave offences, including rape and murder. Professor Sastry highlights that India stands out as one of the few countries where criminals are permitted to participate freely in elections and emerge as winners.

“Look, let’s take the example of the United States. If someone has a murder or rape case, they would never even be considered for a political ticket. Such individuals would be excluded from contesting elections. However, in India, that is not the case. This poses a serious threat to our democratic process. Democracy with criminals is not a healthy democracy. It is crucial to raise awareness among the people about the issue of criminalisation of politics. They need to understand that if they vote for such individuals, they are not just harming the country but also themselves. For instance, if you are a person from an economically disadvantaged background and you vote for such candidates, your children’s education will suffer because the schools won’t be properly run. Similarly, when you need medical assistance, the hospitals will not function effectively due to the massive corruption indulged in by these criminals. You will be deprived of basic amenities and services,” notes Professor Sastry.

According to Gopal Sankaranarayanan, a Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court of India, many politicians are well aware of the significant power and influence they hold as lawmakers. They recognise that their positions grant them the ability to not only block any laws that could hold them accountable but also to exert influence over government officials, ensuring that cases are not filed against them and that they remain protected.

“ADR surveys have shown a gradual rise in the numbers of individuals with criminal offences and charges framed against them. Currently, nearly 44 per cent of all Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs) face serious criminal charges. This is a highly concerning situation. However, both the Supreme Court and the Election Commission find their hands tied in addressing this issue. The resolution lies in the existence of a political will, which unfortunately is challenging to come by,” asserts Sankaranarayanan.

Jagdeep S Chhokar, the Founder and Trustee of ADR, expresses his concerns about the existing laws and their suitability in addressing the issue of criminalisation in politics. He highlights the exploitation of these laws by politicians who take advantage of the loopholes. He says there is an immediate need to tackle the challenge of the intertwining of criminalisation and financial power.

“In the current political landscape, politicians and political parties often prioritise candidate selection based on their perceived “winnability.” However, this criterion solely focuses on a candidate’s ability to secure electoral victory, disregarding the means employed to achieve that victory. Unfortunately, many elections witness the use of illicit methods and unfair practices, which is a departure from the principles of genuine public service. Politics has transformed into a pursuit of power rather than a commitment to serving the public interest,” explains Chhokar.

One major concern in the realm of criminalisation of politics is the classification of political cases filed by rivals as criminal records, which raises questions about the definition and severity of a criminal record. This blurring of lines between politically motivated cases and genuine criminal offences makes it even more easier for political parties to take advantage of the loopholes in the current system.

Political scientist Dr Sandeep Shastri sheds light on the reasons behind the increasing presence of individuals with criminal records in politics. He says that the time has come to reevaluate the definition of a criminal record. “There is an element of numbness that has got into the voters in defining and deciding whom they want to vote for, and that factor does not seem to be high on the order of their priority. This broad category of criminal records includes all types of people—even those against whom political cases filed by rivals have also been classified as a criminal record. What constitutes a criminal record in terms of the seriousness of the crime? All this must be seriously looked at. Today, voters vote keeping in mind the party label and not keeping in mind the candidate label. So, most people don’t look at the profile of a candidate, but they are looking at the profile of the political party. In my view, the combination of the above factors has led to those with criminal records being voted to the legislature,” states Shastri.

Despite repeated calls for electoral reforms and transparency in the political system, the issue of criminalisation of politics continues to plague India’s democratic landscape. The rampant nomination of candidates with criminal backgrounds not only undermines the principles of democracy but also erodes public trust in the electoral process. The lack of political will and loopholes in existing laws have allowed this alarming trend to persist. The time for comprehensive electoral reforms is long overdue, and failure to address the persistent issue of criminalisation of politics poses a grave threat to the very fabric of Indian democracy.

Call us @ 08069405205

Search Here

An Introduction to the CSE Exam
Personality Test
Annual Calendar by UPSC-2024
Common Myths about the Exam
About Insights IAS
Our Mission, Vision & Values
Director's Desk
Meet Our Team
Our Branches
Careers at Insights IAS
Daily Current Affairs+PIB Summary
Insights into Editorials
Insta Revision Modules for Prelims
Current Affairs Quiz
Static Quiz
Current Affairs RTM
Insta-DART(CSAT)
Insta 75 Days Revision Tests for Prelims 2024
Secure (Mains Answer writing)
Secure Synopsis
Ethics Case Studies
Insta Ethics
Weekly Essay Challenge
Insta Revision Modules-Mains
Insta 75 Days Revision Tests for Mains
Secure (Archive)
Anthropology
Law Optional
Kannada Literature
Public Administration
English Literature
Medical Science
Mathematics
Commerce & Accountancy
Monthly Magazine: CURRENT AFFAIRS 30
Content for Mains Enrichment (CME)
InstaMaps: Important Places in News
Weekly CA Magazine
The PRIME Magazine
Insta Revision Modules-Prelims
Insta-DART(CSAT) Quiz
Insta 75 days Revision Tests for Prelims 2022
Insights SECURE(Mains Answer Writing)
Interview Transcripts
Previous Years' Question Papers-Prelims
Answer Keys for Prelims PYQs
Solve Prelims PYQs
Previous Years' Question Papers-Mains
UPSC CSE Syllabus
Toppers from Insights IAS
Testimonials
Felicitation
UPSC Results
Indian Heritage & Culture
Ancient Indian History
Medieval Indian History
Modern Indian History
World History
World Geography
Indian Geography
Indian Society
Social Justice
International Relations
Agriculture
Environment & Ecology
Disaster Management
Science & Technology
Security Issues
Ethics, Integrity and Aptitude

Indian Heritage & Culture
Enivornment & Ecology
How to Study Art & Culture?
What is Art and Culture? What is the difference between the two?
Indus Civilization
Evolution of rock-cut architecture in India
Important rock-cut caves
The contribution of Pallavas to Rock-cut architecture
Comparision of art form found at Ellora and Mahabalipuram
Buddhist Architecture
Early Temples in India
Basic form of Hindu temple
Dravida style of temple architecture
Nagara Style or North India Temple style
Vesara style of temple architecture
Characteristic features of Indo-Islamic form of architecture
Styles of Islamic architecture in the Indian subcontinent
Types of buildings in Islamic architecture in the Indian subcontinent
Evolution of this form of architecture during the medieval period
Modern Architecture
Post-Independence architecture
Indus Civilization Sculpture
Bharhut Sculptures
Sanchi Sculptures
Gandhara School of Sculpture
Mathura School of Sculpture
Amaravati School of Sculpture
Gupta Sculpture
Medieval School of Sculpture
Modern Indian Sculpture
Pre Historic Painting
Mural Paintings & Cave Paintings
Pala School
Mughal Paintings
Bundi School of Painting
Malwa School
Mewar School
Basohli School
Kangra School
Decanni School of Painting
Madhubani Paintings or Mithila paintings
Pattachitra
Kalighat Painting
Modern Indian Paintings
Personalities Associated to Paintings
Christianity
Zoroastrianism
Six Schools of Philosophy
Lokayata / Charvaka
Hindustani Music
Carnatic Music
Folk Music Tradition
Modern Music
Personalities associated with Music
Bharatanatyam
Mohiniattam
Folk Dances
Modern Dance in India
Sanskrit Theatre
Folk Theatre
Modern Theatre
Personalities associated with Theatre
History of Puppetry
String Puppetry
Shadow Puppetry
Rod Puppetry
Glove Puppetry
Indian Cinema and Circus
Shankaracharya
Ramanujacharya (1017-1137AD)
Madhvacharya
Vallabhacharya
Kabir (1440-1510 AD)
Guru Nanak (1469-1538 AD)
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu
Shankar Dev
Purandaradasa
Samard Ramdas
Classical Languages
Scheduled Languages
Literature in Ancient India
Buddhist and Jain Literature
Tamil (Sangam) Literature
Malayalam Literature
Telugu Literature
Medieval Literature
Modern Literature
Important characteristics of Fairs and Festivals of India
Some of the major festivals that are celebrated in India
Art & Crafts
Ancient Science & Technology
Medieval Science & Technology
Famous Personalities in Science & Technology
Tangible Cultural Heritage
Intangible Cultural Heritage
Cultural Heritage Sites
Natural Heritage Sites
Important Institutions
Important programmes related to promotion and preservation of Indian heritage
Ochre Colored Pottery (OCP)
Black and Red Ware (BRW)
Painted Grey-Ware (PGW)
Northern Black Polished Ware (NBPW)
Origin of Martial arts in India
Various forms of Martial arts in India
Definition of Governance
The Values of Sound Public Governance
The Enablers of Sound Public Governance
Towards Sound Policy Implementation
Towards Sound Policy Formulation and Design
Towards Robust Policy Evaluation
A brief overview of modern Governance ideologies/theories
Historical perspective
Constitutional provisions
Structure of a department
Reforms since independence
Strengths and weakness of the existing governance structure
Recommendations of ARC committees and other relevant committees to improve the existing structure
Citizen Centric Governance
Good Governance
Legislative
Administrative
Other measures to improve accountability in India
Transparency and Accountability
Major Initiatives to Enhance Transparency in Public Administration in India
Right to Information Act
Electoral Bonds
Other suggested measures to improve transparency in India
Role of citizens and media in ensuring transparency and accountability.
Definition and Types of E-governance
Objectives of E Governance
Features of E Governance:
Potential of e-governance in India:
Evolution of E-Governance in India
Definition of Citizen Charter
Objective of the Citizen Charter
Salient aspects of Citizen charters
Implementation of citizen charter in India
Concerns related to implementation of Citizen’s Charter
Pressure Group Vs Political Party
Procedure of appointment_CAG
Independence of Office of CAG
Duties and Powers of CAG
Criticism of CAG
Objective analysis of CAG in India
Measures to address any concerns associated with this institution_CAG
Appointment, Conditions of Service and Removal -ECI
INDEPENDENCE AND AUTONOMY OF ECI
Powers and Functions of ECI
Objective analysis of ECI in India
Measures to address any concerns associated with this institution_ECI
Procedure of appointment_UPSC
Functions and responsibilities_UPSC
Objective analysis of UPSC in India
Measures to address any concerns associated with this institution_UPSC
Objective analysis of Finance Commission in India
Definition of a statutory body, regulatory body and a quasi-judicial body
Salient features of a statutory, regulatory and a quasi-judicial body
Definition of Pressure groups
Types of Pressure groups
Functions of Pressure groups
Pressure groups may use a variety of methods to pursue their requirements. These include:
Pressure Groups influence the political system:
Concerns related to Pressure groups in India:
What is a Civil service?
Importance of the Civil Services
Constitutional Provisions Related to Civil Services
Functions of Civil services
Factors that contributed to increasing importance of civil service in modern day society
Problems Affecting Civil Services Today
Increasing politicization of Bureaucracy
Reforms introduced in the domain of civil service in recent years
Measures or recommendations given by relevant committees to address any concerns associated with Civil service in India
Salient features of the Representation of People’s Act, 1950
Salient features of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951
Issues in Elections

Criminalization of Politics

Reforms suggested to address the issues associated with Elections in India
Functions of political parties and their role in a democratic polity
Evolution of political parties in India since independence
Issues plaguing political parties in India and its consequence on democracy
Measures to address the above issues

Home » Governance » Elections in India » Issues associated with elections in India » Criminalization of Politics

Criminalization of Politics means that the criminals entering the politics and contesting elections and even getting elected to the Parliament and state legislature. Criminalization of politics is the focus of public debate when discussion on electoral reforms takes place.

A February 2020 Supreme Court judgement on Criminalization in politics may have far-reaching consequences for Indian democracy. The judgment was passed in a contempt of court case filed against the Chief Election Commissioner of India. The petition claimed the ECI had failed to take any steps to ensure the implementation of a 2018 judgment of the bench, which had made it mandatory for political parties to declare and publish all criminal cases pending against their candidates.

Reasons why criminalization of politics still exists in India:

Corruption:

In every election political parties put up candidates with a criminal background.
Evident link between criminality and the probability of winning is further reinforced when winnability of a candidate is looked into. A candidate facing criminal charges is twice as likely to win as a clean candidate.
The political parties and independent candidates have astronomical expenditure for vote buying and other illegitimate purposes through these criminals.

Denial of Justice and Rule of Law:

Toothless laws against convicted criminals standing for elections further encourage this process. Under current law, only people who have been convicted at least on two counts be debarred from becoming candidates. This leaves the field open for charge sheeted criminals, many of whom are habitual offenders or history-sheeters.
Constitution does not specify what disqualifies an individual from contesting in an election to a legislature.
It is the Representation of People Act which specifies what can disqualify an individual from contesting an election. The law does not bar individuals who have criminal cases pending against them from contesting elections

Lack of governance:

The root of the problem lies in the country’s poor governance capacity.

Scarcity of state capacity :

The scarcity of state capacity is the reason for the public preferring ‘strongmen’ who can employ the required pulls and triggers to get things done.
Criminality, far from deterring voters, encourages them because it signals that the candidate is capable of fulfilling his promises and securing the interests of the constituency.
No political party is free of this problem. The use of muscle power along with money power is a weapon used by all political parties to maximize electoral gains.
With cases dragging in courts for years, a disqualification based on conviction becomes ineffective. Low conviction rates in such cases compounds the problem; voters don’t mind electing candidates facing criminal cases.
Voter behavior then emboldens political parties to give tickets to such candidates who can win an election on their ticket etc.

Landmark judgments pertaining to criminalization of Politics:

The Supreme Court has taken a timely decision by agreeing to hear a plea from the Election Commission of India (ECI) to direct political parties to not field candidates with criminal antecedents
The immediate provocation is the finding that 46% of Members of Parliament have criminal records.
While the number might be inflated as many politicians tend to be charged with relatively minor offences — “unlawful assembly” and “defamation” — the real worry is that the current cohort of Lok Sabha MPs has the highest (29%) proportion of those with serious declared criminal cases compared to its recent predecessors.
The Supreme Court has come up with a series of landmark judgments on addressing this issue .
It removed the statutory protection of convicted legislators from immediate disqualification in 2013, and in 2014, directed the completion of trials involving elected representatives within a year.
In 2017, it asked the Centre to frame a scheme to appoint special courts to exclusively try cases against politicians, and for political parties to publicize pending criminal cases faced by their candidates in 2018.
But these have not been a deterrent to legislators with dubious credentials. Perhaps what would do the trick is a rule that disallows candidates against whom charges have been framed in court for serious offences, but this is something for Parliament to consider as an amendment to the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
This denouement, however, is still a pie in the sky given the composition of the Lower House with a number of representatives facing serious cases.

RPA Criminalization of politics:

Currently, under the Representation of Peoples (RP) Act, lawmakers cannot contest elections only after their conviction in a criminal case.
Section 8 of the Representation of the People (RP) Act, 1951 disqualifies a person convicted with a sentence of two years or more from contesting elections. But those under trial continued to be eligible to contest elections. The Lily Thomas case (2013), however, ended this unfair advantage.

Challenges:

Election Commission has limited powers to legislate on such laws.
Public opinion too is not firm on the issue.
A survey found that opinion was divided when people were asked whether they would vote for an honest candidate who may not get their work done, or a tainted candidate who could get their work done.
While political parties raise concern about candidates with a tainted background contesting elections, none of them come forward to set an example for others when it is time to act.
In the present criminal justice system, it takes years, probably decades, to complete the trial against a politician.
Those with political influence have taken full advantage by delaying hearings, obtaining repeated adjournments and filing innumerable interlocutory petitions to stall any progress.
They also engage in corruption and infect the bureaucracy and the police.

Way Forward:

Law panel report bats for using the time of the framing of charges to initiate disqualification as an appropriate measure to curb the criminalization of politics.
Political parties should themselves refuse tickets to the tainted.
The RPA Act should be amended to debar persons against whom cases of a heinous nature are pending from contesting elections.
Bringing greater transparency in campaign financing is going to make it less attractive for political parties to involve gangsters
The Election Commission of India (ECI) should have the power to audit the financial accounts of political parties, or political parties’ finances should be brought under the right to information (RTI) law
Broader governance will have to improve for voters to reduce the reliance on criminal politicians.
Fast-track courts are necessary because politicians are able to delay the judicial process and serve for decades before prosecution.
The Election Commission must take adequate measures to break the nexus between the criminals and the politicians.
The forms prescribed by the Election Commission for candidates disclosing their convictions, cases pending in courts and so on in their nomination papers is a step in the right direction if it applied properly.
Addressing the entire value chain of the electoral system will be the key to solving the puzzle of minimizing criminal elements from getting elected to our legislatures. This process would involve sensitizing the electorate about the role and responsibility of the elected representatives.
Political parties will have to be encouraged to have stronger inner party democracy to attract this new set of leaders to join the party. And finally, our judicial system will have to be overhauled drastically to ensure that justice is dispensed swiftly in all cases.

Our Mission, Vision & Values
Director’s Desk
Commerce & Accountancy
Previous Years’ Question Papers-Prelims
Previous Years’ Question Papers-Mains
Environment & Ecology
Science & Technology

Your Article Library

Criminalization of politics: nature, causes and recent developments.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Criminalization of Politics: Nature, Causes and Recent Developments!

Definition and Nature:

At present we very often come across the words criminalisation of politics. The meaning of the term is quite known to educated people and newspaper readers. For academic purposes a definition is to be given here. When politics or political power is used by self-interest-seeking persons for pecuniary gains or various other advantages such as to get special position in administration or to rise to the higher stage of administration which is normally not feasible.

So criminalisation of politics means to use politics or political power for nefarious gains. To gain something not legal or normal has been called crime. Here the word crime is used in politics in special sense. For example an officer in administration wants to be promoted to higher post. But this is not his due.He uses politics or political power to achieve this. The person succeeds. But the matter does not stop here. The person who helped to get undue privilege will again use this person tor the achievement of his purposes which are, in normal course, not due. This is the policy of give-and-take and this happens behind the curtain.

Hence we find that political power has been or is being used by some persons for the attainment of undue privileges and when this is rampant in the arena of politics we generally call it criminalisation of politics. To get undue favour through the use of political power is a crime. The term crime means an action which constitutes a serious offence against an individual or the state and is punishable by law. Hence gaining something by the use of political power is a crime and is also punishable.

The use of politics or political power is not something new. Even in ancient Greece politics was used by people for personal gains or for rising to a higher stage of power. The misuse or abuse of political power greatly pained Greek philosopher Plato (BC 427-347). That is why he thought of a philosopher-king and introduction of communism in property and family.

He meant that the members of the administrative class will have no private property and family. Plato’s argument was-these two will divert the attention of the members of the ruling class and will corrupt them. He also thought that if the king is a philosopher he will feel no personal attachment to property and wealth. Plato built up this model for the construction of his ideal state. Our point is the mismanagement of the contemporary city-states which were democratic pained him.

Rousseau (1712-1778) was a great admirer of democracy, but he was quite apprehensive of its real existence. He thought that people are corrupt and this will lead to the fall of democracy. That is why we find him saying: were there a people of gods, their government would be democratic. So perfect a form of government is not for men.

Even in Rousseau’s time there were great inequalities of property and wealth. Some people earned property and built up wealth through unfair means and this created un-equalities in wealth and power. So wealth was used to get patronage in political arena and political power was also used to get wealthy.

Causes of Criminalisation of Politics:

The most important cause of criminalisation of politics is the unholy nexus between politicians and bureaucracy. Ramchandra Guha (India after Gandhi) says, “In Jawaharlal Nehru’s time the civil service was shielded from politics, transfers, promotions and the like were decided within the executive branch itself. From the 1970s, however, individual bureaucrats came increasingly to ally with individual politicians or political parties. When the party they allied with was in power, they get the best postings. In return, they energetically implemented the partisan agenda of the politicians”.

This undesirable and dangerous relationship between bureaucracy and political leaders opened the door of criminalisation of politics. The great founders of Indian nation-state thought of an independent bureaucracy. But within two decades of freedom their hope and dream shattered. Both came to an understanding to help each other and this led to the criminalisation of politics.

The interference of politicians in the administration may be regarded as another reason of criminalisation of politics. Guha’s says, “In a letter to the prime minister, the retired civil servant M. N. Buch has highlighted the consequences of this politicisation of the administration. The way the government is now run means that the disciplinary hierarchy of the civil services has completely broken down. A subordinate who does not measure up and pulled up by his superior knows that he can approach a politician, escape the consequences for his own misdeeds and cause the harm to his superior”

In the 1970s this started in embryonic form and today this has assumed an epidemic. Most of the politicians of modern India interfere with administration in one form or another. The civil servants are becoming more and more corrupt, so also the politicians. The net result is politics is, ultimately, criminalised.

Caste and religion both are equally responsible for the criminalisation of politics. In bureaucracy there are certain fixed procedures and rules in the promotion. But caste and religion both interfere in this process. Less qualified and inefficient civil servants get promotion. The quota system is fully responsible. It has been found that a minister of a particular caste or religion will distribute favour to the members of his own caste and religion. In many states of India this is found.

The system of party government is also responsible for the criminalisation of politics. On the eve of general election the leaders of the party give promises to the electorate. The purpose is to win the election. If the party luckily comes to power, the members of the ruling party try to implement the promises. The dark side of this situation is the party in power does not consider the feasibility and rationality of the action or promises unreasonable and impractical ways and techniques are adopted. This is a cause of criminalisation of politics.

In post-independent India strong public opinion against corrupt practices has not developed. Each person knows that that system or practice is corrupt. But there is nobody to protest against it. Rather, he thinks that this is the system and he accepts it. This tendency has finally opened the door of the criminalisation of politics. But if anybody objects to the corrupt practice he is either penalised or deprived of his due.

Un-development, illiteracy, poverty and prismatic nature of Indian social system are collectively responsible for the criminalisation of politics. The shrewd and self-interest-seeking politicians —in collaboration with corrupt civil servants — adopt various types of unfair means to satisfy their greediness and ill-motives. The Indian society is in transition. From various sources the government of India is getting funds for development.

The government also spends huge amount of money through Five Year Plans. A large amount of money is laundered by politician and bureaucrats. There is a close alliance between the two and this has led to the worst type of criminalisation of politics.

We again remember Plato. He thought that for an ideal state the citizens must be deal and tor that purpose he thought establishing values, morality and idealism in the society. We have forgotten Plato and also the importance of values morality, ethics etc. This has downgraded the importance of moral values, ethics honesty etc.

People generally think of immediate pecuniary gains and give top priority to all these. We, therefore, think that decline of general values has led to the criminalisation of politics. The ghost of Machiavelli has returned. But people have forgot that Machiavelli’s suggestion was made in the background of the pitiable condition of Italy.

In the election of 2005 investigation about the criminal activities of candidates contesting- the election was made and the survey reveals the following figures:

Many political parties of India fielded candidates who had criminal cases against them. Some of these candidates also won in elections. Two points may be made here. One is—the parties fielded the candidates who had criminal background. It means that the parties do not give due importance to this black spot.

The simple implication is that the criminal activities of candidates are not important. The other is that the voters have helped these candidates to win. While exercising franchise it is the duty of the voters to take information about the candidates. We, therefore, conclude that both voters and parties are equally responsible for the criminalisation of politics.

Corruption and crime both have engulfed our MPs. They raise questions in parliament in exchange of money. A few years ago our parliament was in storm on this issue.

Here a part of a newspaper reporting:

“A TV sting operation caught 11 MPs. 6 MPs from BJP, 3 MPs from BSP, one RJD MP and one Congress MR All of them took bribe as ranging from Rs. 15,000 to Rs. 1,10,000 for raising question in parliament. The law-makers were taking paltry amount to subvert the country’s highest democratic institution. The MPs asked questions in Parliament for cash” — Times of India, Kolkata edition, 13.12.2005.

It is a disgrace on the part of the members of the highest democratic institution of our country. This is really a disgrace on the part of the members of parliament. These MPs are law-makers and these laws are implemented to make society crime-free. But the law-makers are themselves parts of criminal activities.

Indian bureaucracy is also highly corrupted. From, the reports published in newspapers we come to know that the top bureaucrats build up fortune of crores of rupees within the first few years of their service. From various sources they get money. The businessmen give bribe to get out-of-the-way benefit. Ordinary people also give bribe to the officers to get quick service. Behind all sorts of corruption there is politics. We can say politics has criminalised everything and the administration tops the list. When both politics and administration are corrupt nothing can remain outside it.

Recent Development in Criminalisation of Politics :

Persons can’t fight from Jail :

The apex court of India in a judgment on July 11, 2013 declared that persons in jail or police custody cannot contest elections to legislative bodies. The order was passed by the Supreme Court along with the landmark verdict that MPs, MLAs and MLCs would be disqualified the day they were convicted. This double whammy against the criminals in Indian legislatures is expected to go a long way in cleaning up politics.

The Supreme Court bench of Justices A. K. Patnayak and S. j. Mukhopadhyaya ruled only an elector can contest the polls and he/she forfeits the right to vote during imprisonment or in police custody. The court based its order on provisions of the Representation of People’s Act. Sections 4 and 5 of the Act lay down that in order to be elected to parliament or state legislatures one must be an elector.

The bench also referred to Section 62(5) of the Act. which says no person shall vote at any election if he is confined in a prison whether under a sentence of imprisonment or transportation or otherwise or in a lawful custody of the police. The apex court also took notice of the fact that crimes in politic have risen from 128 to 162 between 2004 and 2009.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (10.07.13) struck down a provision in the electoral law that protects the convicted law-maker from disqualification on the ground of pendency of appeal in the higher courts. The highest court also made it clear that MPs, MLAs and MLCs will stand disqualified on the date of conviction. The Court said parliament had exceeded its powers by enacting the provision Section 8(4) of the Representation of People’s Act that gives a convicted law-maker the power to remain in office on the ground that appeals have been filed and decision is pending. But the bench of Justices A. K Patnaik and S.J. Mukhopadhayay, in its 41 page ruling, clarified that convicted law-makers, whose appeals were pending prior to their verdict, were saved as it would come into effect prospectively.

The following figures show the miserable condition of criminalisation of politics in India. The two NGOs have collected information. They are Association for Democratic Rights (ADR) and National Election Watch (NEW). Our Lok Sabha has 543 members out of this 30% or 162 members have criminal cases against them. 14% members of the Lok Sabha have serious criminal cases against them. The total number of all state Legislatures in 4032. Out of this 1258 members have criminal cases against them. It is 31% of the total number.

Again 14% have serious criminal cases against them. The 2009 Lok Sabha had 450 tainted faces out of 543 members. These figures show beyond any shadow of doubt that large numbers of our law-makers have tainted faces. These tainted law-makers are engaged in making law to make society free from corruption and all sorts of criminal activities.

The study of ADR and NEW also shows that almost all the national parties are indirectly encouraging or supporting criminal activities of their members or law-makers. Behind this both money and muscle power is directly involved According to ADR and National Election watch (NEW) the criminal activities of the members of national parties are really beyond imagination. More pathetic condition is the national and regional parties are absolutely indifferent. Not only members of the legislatures are tainted, the ministers fall in the same category. The Chief Minister of constituent state is convicted on the ground of embezzlement of public money and other charges.

The judgment of the Supreme Court has thrown both national and regional parties into bewilderment. Behind the criminalisation of politics there are muscle power and money power and these two powers are primarily responsible for all sorts of criminal activities of politicians. If the judgment of the highest Court is implemented most of the parties will face severe crisis-crisis of existence.

The purpose of the Supreme court is to free Indian politics from crimes and the recent judgment aims at this. The Election Commission for pretty long time has been demanding the amendment of Representation of People’s Act. After the judgment of the Supreme court the stand of the Election Commission will be strengthened.

Regulatory Commission:

The Independent Regulatory Commission is an important weapon at the hands of the administration to control the economic and other activities of the various service providers. The system of constituting Independent Regulatory Commission was first introduced in USA. The chief aim was to control the private enterprises which provide all sorts of public utility services.

The private organisations also control major parts and aspects of both state and federal administration. In fact in USA, the federal government plays minimum role in administrative system and in providing various services. Because of this the American government felt the necessity of regulating the activities of the private organisations that provide services. In India there are also Independent Regulatory Commissions. In recent years the necessity of setting up of such commissions has increased several times.

The reasons are:

(1) Since India is a welfare and socialism-biased state its role in providing various types of services for the general welfare of people has enormously increased. On proper and regular investigation it has been found that there is a gap between the aims of service providers and the persons getting services. It means that the aims of the authority which provides service remain unfulfilled-at least substantially. This is undesirable. In order to locate the faults and the responsibility of persons or authority the necessity of setting up of regulatory commission was felt.

(2) Indian administrative system more or less belongs to the Open Model of public administration because outside factors are influencing administration and policy-making activities of the government. It is unavoidable. How the outside influences or openness of environment are regulating the manner of people is to be ascertained.

The authority must know how the outside influences are creating problems or crises for the people. For that purpose the setting up of regulatory commission was felt. India as a part of the world system cannot stay outside It. Naturally outside forces must influence India’s economy, politics, social system and administration. The regulatory commission will enable the state authority to have a clear knowledge of the prevailing situation.

(3) In the economic system of India the private economy and enterprise have crucial and important role. In India there is a system of private property. It is the duty of administration-both central and state-to see that the private economy and private property system are working and if they are adversely affecting the interests of the citizens. Particularly for the purpose the necessity of regulatory commission has been felt.

(4) The industrialisation, urbanisation and at the same time, the unprecedented growth of social mobility very often create problems for ordinary citizens and sometimes make them helpless. These also create problems for administration. It is the duty of a responsible government, with the aim of ensuring welfare, to see that the citizens are not deprived of their legitimate due and other privileges. This has led to the setting up of regulatory commissions.

(5) In USA the regulatory commission is a normal feature of public administration. There is a market economy. The economic issues are determined by the market forces. On experience it has been found that this may invite onslaught on the basic interests of citizens. As it happened during the Great Depression of 1930s.

The government was forced to interfere with the market forces. In India the national economy and property system are considerably regulated by the acts and laws of the central government. In spite of this there is ample scope of private economy to act independently. In this situation there has arisen the necessity of regulatory commission and the administrative system of India has done that job.

(6) One important feature of market economy is that the profit motive of the entrepreneurs is extremely active and this motive neglects the interests of the consumers. Naturally it is expected that the government must have enough control over the activities of private enterprises. If this does not happen the basic interests of the ordinary citizens will be affected.

(7) The developmental process of India is in transition. Many people call India a prismatic society. Social and economic situations are rapidly changing. A major part of the population is vulnerable to all these vicissitudes. Since the citizens are not capable to fight this situation a regulatory system is badly needed. Moreover, the self-interest-seeking persons may exploit the situation. And, generally, this happens. For this reason it is the duty of the government to have precautionary measures so that the life, liberty and property of citizens remain safe.

(8) Finally, with the rise of industrial development and general progress of society, the citizens will face more and more problems and the scope of insecurity will be on the rise. A responsible government with people’s mandate to govern cannot remain a helpless out-looker when the citizens are facing problems.

Politics: Short Speech on Politics
Relationship between Political Science and Politics

Comments are closed.

भाषा : हिंदी
Classroom Courses
Our Selections
Student Login
About NEXT IAS
Director’s Desk
Advisory Panel
Faculty Panel
General Studies Courses
Optional Courses
Interview Guidance Program
Postal Courses
Test Series
Current Affairs
Student Portal

Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) raised concerns as the criminalisation in politics is growing day by day.

Supreme Court’s Statement

The SC found nine political parties guilty of contempt for not following in letter and spirit its February 13, 2020 direction to publish details of criminal cases against candidates fielded in Lok Sabha and Assembly polls.
The SC appeals to lawmakers to come up with necessary legal provisions to fight this “ have fallen on deaf ears ”.
It required political parties to publish details of criminal cases against its candidates on their websites besides a local vernacular newspaper and a national newspaper and social media accounts within 48 hours of candidate selection or not less than two weeks before the first date for filing of nominations, whichever is earlier.
In its recent order , the court modified this and said the details “shall be published within 48 hours of the selection of the candidate” as the latter is difficult to follow given statutory provisions.

Criminalisation of Politics

Began in the late 1970s.
There was no law to bar criminal candidates.
Alarming in the criminalisation of politics has increased in the last 4 general elections.
Unholy nexus between the politicians and bureaucracy: This undesirable and dangerous relationship between bureaucracy and political leaders opened the doors of criminalization of politics.
Caste and religion: Both are responsible for the criminalization of politics. In bureaucracy there are certain procedures and rules for the promotion. But caste and religion both interfere in this process. In many states less qualified civil servants get promotion.
Quota System: The quota system is also fully responsible for this. And it is also found that a minister of a particular caste or religion will distribute favour to the members of his own caste and religion. It is found in many states of India.
Party government: The system of party government is also responsible for the criminalization of politics. On the eve of the general election the leaders of the party give promises to the electorate. But when the political party comes to power then they will do nothing for the members who makes the political party wins, the funds which is given by the government for the public welfare and complete their need and wants but political party use that funds or money for their own purpose and this is also comes in criminalization of politics.
If in any case the candidate has been accused of an offence that is punishable with two or more imprisonment, in any pending case in which the charges have been framed by the court.
S ection 8, Representation of the People Act, 1951 , (The R.P. Act, 1951): It pertains to the cases where a conviction for an offence is involved other than an offence that has been mentioned under and sentenced with imprisonment for one year or more.
Vote Bank: The political parties and individuals have astronomical expenditure for vote buying and other illegitimate purposes through which these people are so called goondas. A politician’s link with the constituency provides the congenial climate to political crime.
Lack of Political will: It remains the most persistent problem. Till date most efforts to reform the electoral system have been taken by EC and the SC only. It is parliament’s responsibility to amend the Representation of People Act 1951, deals with disqualification of candidates against whom charges have been proved in court for serious offences.
Muscle Power and Vote bank: Use of muscle power by politicians to collect votes in their favor.
Corruption: Use of money and other freebies in form of cash and kind both affect the final results of the election to a large extent.
Model Code of Conduct: Its blatant violation is seen in almost all elections.
Awareness Amongst Voters: Making voters aware of candidates with criminal antecedents has its limitations.
Lack of Governance: The SC’s orders or other legal mechanisms are not fully followed thereby creating an anarchic environment in the country. Law breakers end up becoming law makers.
Polarisation Towards Caste/Religions: People still go by their caste system, not considering the actual background, that matters, of the candidate.

Recommendations made by the Election Commission of India in its report on the Proposed Election Reforms, 2004

Section 125A of the R.P.A: The Act should be amended, in order to provide more stringent punishment for concealing or providing wrong information in Form 26 under the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 to a minimum term of two years imprisonment and the alternative punishment of assessing a fine upon the candidate should be removed.
Amend Form 26: It was also recommended to amend Form 26 to include all items of the additional affidavit, that was prescribed by the Election Commission as well as to add a column where the candidates should disclose their annual income for the purpose of tax including their profession.
Amend RPA,1951: The most important recommendation was to make an amendment in The R.P. Act, 1951, to insert a new section that should make a declaration of assets and the criminal cases that are pending against the candidate, this should be made necessary as part of the qualification for membership to the House of the People.
Expand the scope of RPA, 1951: In order to deter the politicians from having a criminal background and the ones who have committed heinous crimes. In case a candidate has charges framed against him under Section 8 with regards to offences and otherwise, he should be disqualified for a duration of six years.

Way Forward

Only court order can not mend criminalisation in politics, political will is required.
To modify the existing laws legal changes should be made and to prevent the criminals from contesting in elections. The criminals should be blacklisted and disciplinary actions must be taken against them.
Follow within 48 hour rule: The details of the candidate “shall be published within 48 hours of the selection of the candidate”
The court also directed political parties to have a caption “candidates with criminal antecedents candidates” on their homepages.
It asked ECI to create a dedicated mobile application containing information published by candidates regarding their criminal antecedents so that voters can get all the information in one stroke and to carry awareness campaigns for voters.
Political Will: Corruption and criminalization of politics is hitting at the roots of democracy. However, mere disqualification for a certain period of time cannot be the final cure under any circumstance. Therefore, Parliament must take steps urgently to curb this menace.
Transparency in funding: Greater transparency should be brought in campaign financing that will make it less desirable for the political parties to comprise the candidates pertaining to criminal background.
Penalty on political parties also: The penalty should be inflicted on the political parties who give tickets to the criminals to contest in elections.
ECI should be given power to audit party accounts: The Election Commission of India (ECI) should be given the power of auditing the financial accounts of the political parties or the finance of the political parties must be brought to the Right to Information (RTI) law.
Better governance for awareness: Broader governance should be improved for voters in order to make them aware if there is any criminal background of the candidate.
Break the nexus: Adequate measures must be taken by the Election Commission in order to break the link between the criminals and politicians.
Derecognizing Parties: In order to set aside the lacunae, it is only possible if the de-criminalisation of politics takes place. Candidates should be disqualified if they violate this provision and the political parties who with the knowledge of their antecedents should be derecognized and deregistered.
Permanent Debarment: Many committees made an important submission that any person who is convicted for heinous crimes such as murder, rape, dacoity, smuggling, etc. should be disbarred permanently from contesting in the elections.
There is an inherent need to supersede the existing judicial hierarchy and establish fast-track courts to accomplish this purpose. This encompasses a quick trial within six months from the time charges are framed so as to determine whether or not a candidate is qualified to hold office and applies to the post vide public elections.
The crime that the candidate is accused of;
How many cases and what kind of cases are charged against the candidate?;
Details of the case, case number and name of Court;
At which stage the criminal case has reached – FIR or investigation or charge-sheet or trial;
Why can’t the other individuals without any criminal antecedents be selected as candidates?
The Vohra Committees Report Analysis on “Criminalisation of Politics” should be given more attention.

Source : IE

More in National Politics

SUBSCRIBER ONLY

National politics | the abortion debate is giving kamala harris a moment. but voters still aren’t sold.

Some states have made it easier to remove registered voters from the rolls. Trump-aligned groups have launched data analysis tools to aid in large-scale challenges to voter registrations.

National Politics | Republicans scrutinize voting rolls and ramp up for mass challenges ahead of election

President Joe Biden listens to a woman speak about the cost of insulin

National Politics | Fact check: Biden is right about $35 insulin cap but exaggerates prior costs for Medicare enrollees

Most Republican-controlled states have now banned gender-affirming health care such as puberty blockers and hormones for transgender minors.

National Politics | Things to know as courts and legislatures act on transgender kids’ rights

Trump and Mike Johnson zero in on noncitizen voting. It’s already illegal and very rare.

Former President Donald Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson pitched new legislation to crack down on noncitizen voting on Friday, despite the fact the practice is already illegal and occurs rarely.

Johnson said House Republicans would introduce a bill to require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote, speaking at Mar-a-Lago next to Trump as he seeks to fend off threats from his right flank.

“It seems like common sense, I’m sure all of us would agree that we only want U.S. citizens to vote in U.S. elections,” Johnson said, falsely suggesting that “so many people” are registering to vote when they obtain welfare benefits.

It is already a crime to register or vote as a noncitizen in all state and federal elections, though Washington, D.C., and a handful of municipalities in California, Maryland and Vermont allow noncitizen voting in local elections.

And few individuals break those laws.

“This is a crime where not only are the consequences really high and the payoff really low — you’re not getting millions of dollars, it’s not robbing a bank, you get to cast one ballot,” said Sean Morales-Doyle, a lawyer at the Brennan Center for Justice. “But what also makes this somewhat unique is that committing this crime actually entails the creation of a government record of your crime.”

Registering to vote and casting a ballot both leaves a paper trail that elected officials are required by law to routinely review. Some records are available to the public, as well.

“It’s very easy to catch, and you will get caught,” Morales-Doyle added.

Donald Trump speaks as Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., listens

The consequences are sweeping, too: noncitizens can face jail time, fines or deportation for voting illegally. Registering to vote alone could carry a five-year prison sentence, according to the Brennan Center.

On the flip side, Morales-Doyle said, requiring documentary proof of citizenship could disenfranchise millions of Americans who do not have access to passports or birth certificates.

Several states have tried to require documentary proof of citizenship in the past, but federal law currently prohibits it in federal elections. Arizona requires it for state elections, alone.

Many have investigated noncitizen voting and found little evidence of it. The Brennan Center found just 30 suspected noncitizen votes amid 23.5 million votes in 2016 , suggesting that suspected noncitizen votes accounted for 0.0001 % of votes cast. Trump’s own election integrity commission disbanded without releasing evidence of voter fraud, even though he’d claimed 3 million undocumented immigrants had voted in 2016 costing him the popular vote.

But Johnson and Trump have both long advanced baseless claims about election integrity. Johnson repeatedly promoted conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and its voting machines being rigged, and he recruited Republicans to back a lawsuit seeking to overturn states where Trump lost.

For Trump, however, the proposal fuses two of his favorite talking points: immigration and voter fraud.

“It’s the sort of story that if you’re inclined to not like immigrants in the first place feels truthy,” said Justin Levitt, a former Biden advisor on democracy issues and election policy expert. “I think that has helped it stayed politically potent even if it hasn’t gotten more true.”

Levitt said when noncitizens do vote, it’s typically a misunderstanding or mistake. He said he recalled an instance where California residents in the process of naturalizing were told they had been granted citizenship and immediately left naturalization interviews to register to vote. They had not been formally sworn in as citizens, however, and therefore were not eligible yet.

Jane C. Timm is a senior reporter for NBC News.

Trump lawyers say Stormy Daniels refused subpoena outside a Brooklyn bar, papers left 'at her feet'

N EW YORK (AP) — Donald Trump’s legal team says it tried serving Stormy Daniels a subpoena as she arrived for an event at a bar in Brooklyn last month, but the porn actor, who is expected to be a witness at the former president's criminal trial , refused to take it and walked away.

A process server working for Trump's lawyers said he approached Daniels with papers demanding information related to a documentary recently released about her life and involvement with Trump, but was forced to “leave them at her feet," according to a court filing made public Wednesday.

The encounter, prior to a screening of the “Stormy” film at the 3 Dollar Bill nightclub, has touched off a monthlong battle between Trump’s lawyers and Daniels' attorney that continued this week as the presumptive Republican nominee's criminal trial began in Manhattan.

Trump's lawyers are asking Judge Juan M. Merchan to force Daniels to comply with the subpoena. In their filing, they included a photo they said DellaPorte took of Daniels as she strode away.

Daniels' lawyer Clark Brewster claims they never received the paperwork. He described the requests as an “unwarranted fishing expedition” with no relevance to Trump's criminal trial.

“The process — instituted on the eve of trial — appears calculated to cause harassment and/or intimidation of a lay witness,” Brewster wrote in an April 9 letter to Merchan. Brewster didn't immediately reply to a message from The Associated Press seeking comment.

The hush money case is the first of Trump's four criminal cases to go to trial. Seven jurors have been seated so far. Jury selection is set to resume Thursday.

Daniels is expected to testify about a $130,000 payment she got in 2016 from one of Trump's lawyers at the time, Michael Cohen, in order to stop her from speaking publicly about a sexual encounter she said she had with Trump years earlier.

Cohen was later reimbursed by Trump's company for that payment. Trump is accused of falsifying his company’s records to hide the nature of that payment, and other work he did to bury negative stories during the 2016 campaign.

In a separate filing made public Wednesday, the Manhattan district attorney's office said that if Trump chooses to testify at the trial, prosecutors plan to challenge his credibility by questioning him about his recent legal setbacks. The filing was made last month under seal.

Merchan said he plans to hold a hearing Friday to decide whether that will be allowed.

Under New York law, prosecutors can question witnesses about past legal matters in certain circumstances. Trump's lawyers are opposed. Trump has said he wants to testify, but he is not required to and can always change his mind.

As for the subpoena dispute, it marks the latest attempt by Trump’s lawyers to knock loose potentially damaging information about Daniels, a key prosecution witness.

They are also requesting Daniels reveal how much, if anything, she was compensated for the film.

In the filings made public Wednesday, Trump’s attorneys accuse Daniels of “plainly seeking to promote her brand and make money based on her status as a witness."

FILE - Stormy Daniels appears at an event, May 23, 2018, in West Hollywood, Calif. The hush money trial of former President Donald Trump begins Monday, April 15, 2024, with jury selection. It's the first criminal trial of a former U.S. commander-in-chief. The charges in the trial center on $130,000 in payments that Trump's company made to his then-lawyer, Michael Cohen. He paid that sum on Trump's behalf to keep Daniels from going public, a month before the election, with her claims of a sexual encounter with Trump a decade earlier. (AP Photo/Ringo H.W. Chiu, File)

IMAGES

Essay On CRIMINALISATION OF POLITICS
Criminalization of Politics
News & Contemporary Issues
Criminalization of politics
(PDF) Criminalization of Indian Politics
INSIGHTS MINDMAPS: "Criminalization of Politics".

VIDEO

Students and politics essay || teach chnnal
Criminal contesting elections?? |Criminalisation of Politics.
Students and politics essay in English || Students and politics par English essay
నేర చరితులకు టిక్కెట్లు ఇవ్వొద్దు || Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan
ANSWER WRITING FOR MAIN CRIMINALISATION OF POLITICS
Criminalisation of Politics #paragraph #essay #grammar #speech #exam #important #english #haryanaboa

COMMENTS

Criminalisation of politics: causes, impacts and solutions
Since, in India electoral politics is more about caste, ethnicity, religion and several other factors, candidates overcome the reputational loss due to criminal charges and come out as victorious in elections. Black money in elections: Electoral politics is largely dependent on the money and the funding that it receives.
Criminalization of Politics
The criminalization of politics means the participation of criminals in politics which includes that criminals can contest in the elections and get elected as members of the Parliament and the State legislature. It takes place primarily due to the nexus between politicians and criminals.
PDF © 2020 JETIR October 2020, Volume 7, Issue 10 CRIMINALIZATION OF
Criminalization of politics is a major issue of concern in the Indian politics. When crime becomes highly visible on the political agenda and with it new problems emerge in politics, development of unholy nexus between criminals and politicians is called criminalization of politics. It is, therefore, essential to
Criminalization of Politics in India: Causes, Effects, Measures
The rising percentage of members of parliament who have a criminal background: 2004 - 24%, 2009 - 30%, 2014 - 34% and 2019 -43%. Around 50% of MPs in the new Lok Sabha have criminal records. This increasing number of members with criminal records in parliament endangers the survival of any true democracy. In this article, you will learn everything about the criminalisation of politics viz ...
The criminalization of politics, the politics of criminalization and
Christian Olsson is professor in political science at Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), director of its research unit in international relations (REPI) and affiliated to its Observatory of the Arab and Muslim worlds (OMAM). He has recently published in Millenium, Critical Military Studies and the Canadian Journal of Political Science.
The Concept of Criminalization of Politics in India
Abstract. The Indian democracy is one of the largest in the world yet the internal political system is infested with some of the very crude problem that other counties of the world have long overcome. It is very important that democracy forms the basic structure of the society. Effort must be made to make society democratic.
Trumped Up: How Criminalization of Political Differences Endangers
Everything he has done is wrong, and since it is wrong, it must necessarily be criminal. This deeply undemocratic fallacy—that political sins must be investigated and prosecuted as criminal—is an exceedingly dangerous trend. Hardening positions on both sides has been manifested by increasing demands to criminalize political differences.
Opinion
When Politics Is Criminalized. We are surrounded on all sides by news of criminal investigations into politicians. Robert Mueller, the special counsel, has obtained an indictment relating to his ...
Criminalization of Politics and Politicization of Criminals: A ...
The Law Commission of India and several other committees have already recommended different means to overcome the present situation of criminalization of politics. The Supreme Court of India has from time to time given the guidelines for uprooting the phenomenon of criminalization of politics.
Criminalisation of Politics
The criminalization of politics means the participation of criminals in politics which includes that criminals can contest in the elections and get elected as members of the Parliament and the State legislature. It takes place primarily due to the nexus between politicians and criminals. Legal Aspects of Disqualification of Criminal Candidates ...
Criminalization of Politics
To write an effective UPSC essay on "Criminalization of Politics," it is crucial to structure it with a clear introduction, body, and conclusion. Here is a proposed structure for the essay, followed by the essay itself: Introduction. Start with a quote or phrase to set the tone. Briefly define criminalization of politics.
Criminalization of Politics
In India, the Criminalization of politics has become a growing concern, with a significant number of elected officials facing criminal charges. This has led to public distrust in the political system and the perception that politicians use their power to evade the law. The criminalization of politics refers to the involvement of individuals ...
Criminalization of politics
"Criminalization of politics" is a political buzzword in the United States used in the media, by commentators, bloggers as well as by defenders of high-ranking government officials who have been indicted or have faced criminal or ethical investigations. Most recently, the term has been applied to proceedings against President George W. Bush's advisers and the Republican Party leadership in ...
Criminalisation of Politics
Effect of Criminalisation of Politics. Against the Principle of Free and Fair Election: Using money and muscle power in elections, limits the choice of voters to elect a suitable candidate. Also, it is against the ethos of free and fair election which is the bedrock of a democracy. Affecting Good Governance: The major problem is that the law ...
Criminalization of Politics in India
The criminalisation of Indian politics holds the effect of restricting the procedure of righteousness and causing further uncertainties in trials. Offenders entering Indian politics further boosts crime in public life. It negatively affects the state organisations, including the executive, bureaucracy, legislature, and courts.
Criminalisation of Politics: A Grave Threat to Democracy
The infiltration of criminals into politics has become a growing concern, raising serious questions about the integrity of democratic processes. The criminalisation of politics, with candidates charged with heinous offences holding positions of power, has cast a shadow on governance, accountability, and the people's trust, writes Diksha Puri.
PDF Supremo Amicus Criminalisation of Politics in India
essays published by people on this topic, since the problem is an emerging one. This research paper will also use other research techniques. Keywords: Criminalizationof politics, politics, democracy, constitutional safeguards Introduction to Criminalization of Politics Criminalization of politics is when politics
Criminalization of Politics
Criminalization of Politics means that the criminals entering the politics and contesting elections and even getting elected to the Parliament and state legislature. Criminalization of politics is the focus of public debate when discussion on electoral reforms takes place. A February 2020 Supreme Court judgement on Criminalization in politics ...
Criminalization of Politics: Nature, Causes and Recent Developments
The most important cause of criminalisation of politics is the unholy nexus between politicians and bureaucracy. Ramchandra Guha (India after Gandhi) says, "In Jawaharlal Nehru's time the civil service was shielded from politics, transfers, promotions and the like were decided within the executive branch itself.
SC on Criminalisation of Politics
565. Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) raised concerns as the criminalisation in politics is growing day by day. The SC found nine political parties guilty of contempt for not following in letter and spirit its February 13, 2020 direction to publish details of criminal cases against candidates fielded in Lok Sabha and Assembly polls.
Trump lawyers say Stormy Daniels refused subpoena outside a Brooklyn
It's the first criminal trial of a former U.S. commander-in-chief. The charges in the trial center on $130,000 in payments that Trump's company made to his then-lawyer, Michael Cohen.
Trump and Mike Johnson zero in on noncitizen voting. It's already
It is already a crime to register or vote as a noncitizen in all state and federal elections, though Washington, D.C., and a handful of municipalities in California, Maryland and Vermont allow ...
Supreme Court on Criminalisation of Politics
Why in News. Recently, the Supreme Court in the two different judgements has raised concerns about the menace of criminalisation in politics.. In one case, it found nine political parties guilty of contempt for not following in letter and spirit its February 13, 2020 direction.; In another case, it has issued directions that no criminal case against MPs or MLAs can be withdrawn without an ...
Trump lawyers say Stormy Daniels refused subpoena outside a ...
The hush money case is the first of Trump's four criminal cases to go to trial. Seven jurors have been seated so far. Jury selection is set to resume Thursday. Daniels is expected to testify about ...
Criminalisation of Politics
About: Criminalisation of politics is defined as the situation when criminals participate in the politics of the government, i.e., contest elections and get elected to the Parliament and state legislatures. This growing menace has become a big problem for our society, affecting the basic principles of democracy, such as fairness in elections ...
Criminalization of Politics
The criminalization of politics means the participation of criminals in politics which includes that criminals can contest in the elections and get elected as members of the Parliament and the State legislature. It takes place primarily due to the nexus between politicians and criminals. Legal Aspect of Disqualification of Criminal Candidates.

Criminalisation of politics: causes, impacts and solutions – Explained, pointwise

Introduction

A little background of the petition

What is criminalisation of politics?

What are the recent trends?

What are the causes of criminalisation of politics in India?

What are the impacts of criminalisation of politics in India?

What are the initiatives taken so far to overcome the issue of the criminalisation of politics in India?

What are some of the landmark judgements on criminalisation of politics in India?

What are the various recommendations on de-criminalization of politics?

What should be done?

Search Articles

Prelims 2024 Current Affairs

Criminalization of Politics in India: Causes, Effects, Measures

What is the Criminalisation of Politics?

Express Learning Programme (ELP)

What is the status of Criminal Politics in India?

Prelims Sureshots – Most Probable Topics for UPSC Prelims

How did Indian politics become criminalized?

Money Power:

Loopholes in the functioning of elections:

Weak Judicial System & Denial of Justice:

Why criminal politics is a grave concern?

What are the measures taken?

ECI’s reforms

The Supreme Court’s verdicts

Centre’s measures

How effective were those measures?

What are the key features of the SC verdict on Criminal Politics?

What are the concerns with the judgement?

What more could be done?

Practice Question:

Related Posts

Block Member?

Alan Dershowitz , Trumped Up: How Criminalization of Political Differences Endangers Democracy (2017).

When Politics Is Criminalized

Criminalization of Politics | UPSC Mains Essay Preparation PDF Download

Introduction

Sample Essay

Top Courses for UPSC

Criminalization of Politics Free PDF Download

Forgot Password

Criminalization of Politics

What are the reasons for the criminalization of politics in India?

What is ‘criminalization of politics’ and its status in India?

Supreme Court

Election Commission of India

Previous Year Questions(PYQs)

Frequently Asked Questions(FAQs)

Q) Can a person, who is convicted, contest the elections after completing his/her sentence?

Criminalization of Politics

What do we mean by the criminalisation of politics?

Understanding the Causes of Criminalisation in Politics

What are Some Reasons for the Criminalisation of Politics in India?

What are some Consequences of the Criminalisation of Politics?

Frequently Asked Questions on Criminalization of Politics

How do I study the topic of criminalisation of politics?

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Criminalisation of Politics: A Grave Threat to Democracy

Search Here

Criminalization of Politics

Your Article Library

Definition and Nature:

Causes of Criminalisation of Politics:

Recent Development in Criminalisation of Politics :

Related Articles:

Comments are closed.

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

More in National Politics

SUBSCRIBER ONLY

National Politics | Republicans scrutinize voting rolls and ramp up for mass challenges ahead of election

National Politics | Fact check: Biden is right about $35 insulin cap but exaggerates prior costs for Medicare enrollees

National Politics | Things to know as courts and legislatures act on transgender kids’ rights

Trump and Mike Johnson zero in on noncitizen voting. It’s already illegal and very rare.

Trump lawyers say Stormy Daniels refused subpoena outside a Brooklyn bar, papers left 'at her feet'

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS