New Delhi: The Law Commission has favoured disqualification of a candidate on framing of charges by a court, saying it has significant potential to check criminals entering the poll arena and dubbed disqualification upon conviction as "incapable" of curbing criminals in politics.
The Commission has also recommended enhanced sentence of at least two years for those who file false affidavits and make it as a "corrupt practice" under Representation of the People Act.
In a report submitted to the Supreme Court on disqualification of candidates and filing of false affidavits, the Law Commission has said "disqualification upon conviction has proved to be incapable of curbing the growing criminalisation of politics, owing to long delays in trials and rare convictions.
"The law needs to evolve to pose an effective deterrence and to prevent subversion of the process of justice."
The panel`s report on the two issues of electoral reforms came up before the apex court today.
The Commission said the stage of framing of charges (for an offence punishable by at least five years imprisonment) is based on "adequate levels of judicial scrutiny" and disqualification at the stage of charging, if accompanied by substantial attendant legal safeguards to prevent misuse, has "significant potential" in curbing the spread of criminalisation of politics.
The filing of the police report under Section 173 of CrPC is "not an appropriate stage" to introduce electoral disqualifications due to "lack of sufficient application of judicial mind at this stage," the law panel said.
Referring to the proposed safeguards while disqualifying a candidate at the stage of framing of charges, the panel said only offences which have a maximum punishment of five years or above ought to be included within the remit of the provision.
It said if charges are filed up to one year before the date of scrutiny of nominations for an election, then it will not lead to disqualification.
"The disqualification will operate till an acquittal by the trial court, or for a period of six years, whichever is earlier," it recommended.
It said for charges framed against sitting MPs/MLAs, the trial must be conducted on a day-to-day basis and concluded within one year.
The Law Commission said if trial is not concluded within a year period, then the MP or the MLA may be disqualified at the expiry of the one-year period or his or her right to vote in the House as a member, remuneration and other perquisites attached to their office "shall be suspended" at the expiry of the one-year period.
The report said persons with charges pending (punishable by 5 years or more) on the date of the law coming into effect must be disqualified from contesting future elections, unless such charges are framed less than one year before the date of scrutiny of nomination papers for elections or the person is a sitting MP/MLA at the time of enactment of the Act.
"Such disqualification must take place irrespective of when the charge was framed," it said.
On the issue of filing of false disclosures in affidavits, it has recommended enhanced sentence of a minimum of two years under Section 125A of the RP Act.
It said those convicted of filing false affidavits should also stand disqualified.
The panel has also recommended including the offence of filing false affidavit as a corrupt practice under Section 123 of the RP Act.
In December, the apex court had asked the law panel to submit a report on the two issues ? whether disqualification should be triggered on conviction as it exists today or upon framing of charges or filing of charge sheet and whether filing of false affidavit under Section 125A of Representation of the People Act should be a ground for disqualification.
It wanted to know that if it can be a ground for disqualification, the what mode and mechanism should be followed for such disqualification.
