SC cleanup of corruption in politics
Q. Which of the following is/are true?
1) As per new SC orders, Legislators on conviction will be given three months’ time to appeal to higher court before being disqualified from holding membership of the House.
2) SC has ordered that criminal trials, especially those dealing with corruption and heinous offences, involving elected representatives should be completed in a year.- Published on 10 Mar 16a. Only 1
b. Only 2
c. Both 1 and 2
d. Neither 1 nor 2
ANSWER: Only 2
- In 2013 SC first held that legislators, on conviction, would be immediately disqualified from holding membership of the House without being given three months’ time for appeal, as was the case before. Before this verdict, convicted lawmakers would file an appeal in the higher court and continue in the House.
- In March 2014, the Supreme Court passed an interim order that criminal trials, especially those dealing with corruption and heinous offences, involving elected representatives should be completed in a year. This order prevented lawmakers from sitting in the House as their cases dragged on.
- Opening its third chapter against corruption in politics, the Supreme Court three-judge Bench, headed by Justice Ranjan Gogoi, referred to a Constitution Bench the question whether a legislator facing criminal trial should be disqualified at the very stage of framing of charges against him by the trial court. Should his disqualification be kept in abeyance till he is convicted? i.e. whether the country should even wait until a corrupt legislator is convicted to have him disqualified from Parliament or Assembly?
