🚨 UPSC EXAM NOTES presents the July edition of our comprehensive monthly guide. Access it  to enhance your preparation. We value your input - share your thoughts and recommendations in the comments section or via email at Support@upscexamnotes.com 🚨

Critical Topics and Their Significance for the UPSC CSE Examination on February 13 20205

Daily Insights and Initiatives for UPSC Exam Notes: Comprehensive explanations and high-quality material provided regularly for students

Should convicted persons contest elections?

For Preliminary Examination:  Current events of national and international importance

For Mains Examination: GS II - Polity & Governance

Context:

The Supreme Court is hearing petitions filed by Ashwin Upadhyay and others, seeking a life time ban on convicted persons from contesting elections

Read about:

What does the Representation of the People Act, 1951 stipulate with respect to electoral candidates convicted of criminal offences?

Election Commission (EC)

Key takeaways:

• Under Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RP Act, 1951), individuals convicted of a criminal offense and sentenced to a minimum of two years of imprisonment face disqualification from contesting elections.
• This disqualification extends for an additional six years after their release. Additionally, Section 8(1) specifies that those convicted under laws addressing severe crimes—such as rape, offenses under the Protection of Civil Rights (PCR) Act related to untouchability, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for unlawful associations, and the Prevention of Corruption Act—will be barred from contesting elections regardless of their sentence duration, along with a further six-year disqualification post-release.
• The Supreme Court has delivered significant rulings to curb the criminalization of politics. In the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) case (2002), it mandated that all election candidates disclose their criminal records.
• In the CEC vs Jan Chaukidar case (2013), the court upheld the Patna High Court's interpretation of the RP Act, 1951. According to the Act, one of the qualifications to contest elections is that the individual must be an 'elector.'
• Section 62(5) states that prisoners are ineligible to vote, leading the court to conclude that under-trial detainees, being non-electors, also do not qualify to contest elections. However, in 2013, Parliament amended the Act to overturn this ruling, allowing under-trial prisoners to participate in elections.
• In Lily Thomas (2013), the Supreme Court struck down Section 8(4) of the RP Act, which had permitted sitting legislators to retain their positions while appealing a conviction. The court deemed this provision unconstitutional, emphasizing that a legislator would now face immediate disqualification upon conviction.
• Section 11 of the RP Act, 1951, grants the Election Commission (EC) the authority to reduce or remove the disqualification period of a convicted individual. This power was exercised in September 2019 when the EC reduced the disqualification period of Prem Singh Tamang, the Chief Minister of Sikkim, from six years to 13 months, enabling him to contest and win a byelection.
• This decision was contentious, especially since Tamang was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, despite the EC itself advocating for stronger measures to curb political criminalization.
• A current petition before the Supreme Court seeks a lifetime ban on convicted individuals from contesting elections. Petitioners argue that if a convicted individual