Damned if you do and damned if you don’t — action or inaction on part of political parties would result in a negative outcome. That appears to be the fallout of the landmark Supreme Court judgment which not only lays the onus of decriminalising politics squarely on political parties, but also makes them accountable for it.
A crucial step towards weeding out tainted individuals from enjoying a life of impunity purely on the basis of the powers and the clout they enjoy by virtue of being members of Parliament, the Supreme Court today made it mandatory for political parties to list out all details of the pending criminal cases against any of their candidates.
That data, however, was already being made public, thanks to NGOs who diligently go through the data furnished by candidates at the time of filing their affidavits before the Election Commission of India. So, what is it that makes this Thursday’s order by the top court significant?
Two factors. First, the SC has made any failure on part of political parties to comply with the orders liable to contempt of court, thus making it a punishable offence. Notably, it is not the candidate on whom the onus of making the details of pending cases against him lies. Political parties have been made directly accountable.
Second and, perhaps, the more effective facet of this order is the direction to political parties to declare the details on their website and social media accounts. The most painful part of the order, for political parties, of course, is to put out an explanation on why they chose a candidate facing criminal cases as well as their failure to find a candidate with a clean slate.
Elections are being increasingly fought on social media, with parties using these platforms to run promotional campaigns as well as those intended to vilify opponents. At a time and age where a single inadvertent error can result in a public figure trending in no second, a dossier detailing all that parties have tried to brush under the carpet will prove a blessing at the hands of opponents.
The only catch here is that there is no party less dirty than the other. Political parties of all hues have given shelter to leaders with criminal antecedents and allowed them to flourish. So, it is not one party or one side of the political divide which comes out as the winner. All parties have dirt on their hands and it is this factor that threatens to dilute the effectiveness of this landmark move by the Supreme Court.
On the flip side though, the voter today is more aware than ever. While politicians may shy away from targeting each other for fear of being answered in the same coin, the people will have a potent tool at their hands to put their leaders to test and make an informed choice instead of going by plain political rhetoric. While the change may take time to come, the political parties will know that the Supreme Court has its lens on tainted politicians, and so do the people.