Farhat Naik
The increasing number of defections among elected representatives, particularly Members of Parliament, has raised serious concerns about the health of India’s democratic institutions. The latest development involves six MPs from Shiv Sena (UBT) expressing their intention to join the faction led by Eknath Shinde, which emerged following an earlier division within the party.
Since these MPs account for two-thirds of the party’s Lok Sabha representation, they are expected to invoke the “merger” provision available under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, commonly known as the anti-defection law. The law provides for the disqualification of legislators who voluntarily leave their party or violate a party whip during voting. Amendments introduced in 2003 eliminated the earlier provision that permitted one-third of a party’s legislators to split without penalty, leaving only the merger exception. Under this rule, disqualification can be avoided if at least two-thirds of a party’s legislators agree to merge with another political formation.
Critics argue that this provision is increasingly being used to legitimise defections that are, in substance, political realignments rather than genuine mergers. The Supreme Court has previously observed that a valid merger must involve not only the legislative wing but also the parent political party. However, unresolved constitutional questions and delayed judicial decisions have allowed such claims to continue with little scrutiny.
The recent developments in the Shiv Sena come amid similar political turbulence elsewhere. Reports of divisions within the Trinamool Congress and earlier defections involving members of the Aam Aadmi Party have added to concerns about the effectiveness of the anti-defection law. Several resignations and shifts in political allegiance across both Houses of Parliament have altered party strengths and influenced the broader political landscape.
These developments have sparked a wider debate about the purpose of the Tenth Schedule and whether it still serves as an effective safeguard against political opportunism. Frequent defections not only affect party balances but also raise questions about voter mandates and democratic accountability. As the ruling alliance gains strength through such political shifts, concerns are growing that the spirit of constitutional safeguards and the principle of broad political consensus could be weakened.
The issue extends beyond legal interpretation. It touches upon the integrity of representative democracy and the expectation that elected representatives honour the mandate on which they were chosen by voters. Unless greater clarity emerges from constitutional authorities and the judiciary, debates over defections and mergers are likely to remain at the centre of India’s political discourse.
