The growing criminalisation of politics and politicization of criminals have taken heavy toll on policing in the country. This phenomenon has further eroded the credibility, effectiveness, and impartiality of the police and resulted into lack of trust and confidence in police forces in large sections of the society.

The administration and the police are the first causalities of criminalisation of the politics, resulting into a system of law that is neither fair nor impartial.

The Government of India woke up belatedly to this alarming situation and convened a conference of Chief Ministers on the “Administration of Criminal Justice in India” in 1992. The conference took note of the lack of financial support to not only police but other two wings of criminal justice system, namely, the judiciary and the jails.

In the resolution passed in the conference, it was mentioned that, “over the years, the expenditure on criminal justice administration on all the three areas of police, judiciary and jails has declined”.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

They also expressed their grave concern at the increasing criminalization of politics and politicization of administration. The conference recommended formation of a committee under the Home| Minister, Government of India for follow up action. Nothing however, happened.

The following year, I Government constituted a committee with Union Home Secretary N.N. Vohra as Chairman, and Secre­tary R&W, Director I.B., Director C.B.I. Special Secretary Home as members.

The committee was asked to take stock of all available information about the activities of crime syndicates/Mafia organizations Thai had developed links with and were being protected by government functionaries and political personali­ties and make recommendations.

The committee inter alia reported on 3rd October 1993 that a nexus between the criminal gangs, police, bureaucracy and politicians was common occurrence in various parts of the country. In states like Bihar, U.R and Haryana, the mafia gangs enjoyed the patronage ol local politicians and the protection of government functionaries.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

The report further said that the mafia network was virtually running a parallel government, making the state apparatus virtually irrelevant. The (crime) syndicates had acquired substantial financial muscle power as well as respectability to wield enough influence to make the task of investigating and prosecuting agencies extremely difficult. Even members of judiciary had not escaped the influence of mafia and not infrequently officer’s in-charge cases were transferred long before they could complete their task.

evel-ll: Inspectors, Sub-Inspectors & Asst. Sub-Inspectors (11.51%)

Level-Ill: Police Constabulary (87.61%)

Unfortunately, over the years the situation has been allowed to become worse. On 28th August 1997, the Election Commissioner G.V.G. Krishnamurti startled the nation by revealing statistics, show­ing politicization of criminals. According to him, of 1,37,752 candidates who had contested the General Election to the Lok Sabha in 1996, nearly 1500 had criminal records of murder, dacoity, rape, theft or extortion. U.P. alone accounted for 520 such candidates and Bihar had the second largest number of 350. Mr. G.V.G. Krishnamurti further revealed that the eleventh Lok Sabha had reportedly 40 members, who had criminal background, Nearly 700 MLA’s out of 4722 in the country then were involved in crimi­nal cases and trials were pending against them in 25 states and two union territories.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Not that the politicians and law makers are unaware of dangers that the situation poses for Indian democracy.

In the special session of Lok Sabha, on the occasion of the golden jubilee year of Independence, the house passed a resolution of 31st August 1997 saying inter alia that, “more especially, all political parties shall undertake all such steps as will attain the objective of ridding of our polity of criminalization or its influence”. But it remained a pious resolution.

When it came to concrete reforms, barring few, political parties across the board stalled electoral reforms. In the year 2002, in the light of instruction of the Supreme Court, the Election Commission issued directive requiring the candidates seeking elections, to file affidavit indicating their criminal record or their assets etc.

An all-party meeting rejected this proposal as well as a subsequent one to amend the Representation of People’s Act to bar candidates from fighting elections who had two or more criminal cases of heinous nature pending against them under trial in Courts.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

The Supreme Court finally upheld the directive of Election Commission requiring candidates seeking elections to file affidavits along with nomination papers, indicating details regarding their criminal record, if any, and assets held by them.

This was implemented during the Lok Sabha election held in April – May 2004, but oddly enough, it has not been possible to prevent persons with criminal records from entering Lok Sabha. Barring exceptions, all parties, particularly from north have their skeletons in their cup-boards. According to statistics published recently, the NDA has 37 MPs with criminal records. Of 137 BJP MPs, the EC has listed 26 i.e. about 20%. Out of 145 Congress MPs, 15 have criminal records against them. The R.J.D. has reportedly 40% of their MPs and BSP over one-third “tainted” ones. Janata Dal (United) and Lok Jan Shakti have their own shares.

What is unprecedented is that some of the ministers in the Central Government had serious cases under trial in the courts pending against them. Police face, “Nuremberg dilemma” today. What can they do when law has to be enforced against a central minister, as it happened in a case of cabinet minister from Jharkhand state recently?

The court issued non-bailable warrant against him. The minister went underground. The PM or the HM would not tell the parliament, as to where the minister was. What is happening today is not merely challenge to policing in the country but the whole Criminal Justice Sys­tem. Time is running out and unless something is done to stem the rot, the entire system will collapse, the policing system, included. What is required today is to take a holistic view and carry out urgent reforms in police, judiciary and electoral laws simultaneously.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Criminalisation of politics and corruption in public life has become the biggest threat to India, the world’s largest democracy.

The roots of corruption lie in the election expenses of the candidates. The statutory limit – Rs 15 lakhs for a Lok Sabha seat (depending on the constituency and the number of voters), Rs 3 to 6 lakhs for state legislatures (depending on the area), and Rs 75,000 for municipal corporations – is too less.

In practice, the expenses incurred by the candidates are much more. As the candidates generally don’t have so much money to spend, the funds usually come on the basis of quid pro quo from the business world or the underworld. Once the candidate becomes an MP, MLA or a minister, he has to reciprocate to his donors in a big way. This is the root cause of corruption.

Corruption at higher levels of political leadership leads to corruption in the bureaucracy and other wings of the administration like the police or the Public Works Department. It spreads from top to bot­tom.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

It travels downwards into the entire bureaucratic apparatus and also amongst the civilians. Along with money power, muscle power has also polluted elections. Unfortunately, a large number of our MPs and legislators have criminal records against them. Uttar Pradesh and Bihar top the list.

Historic ruling:

The Union Government, all political parties and several NGOs including our “Citi­zens for National Consensus” (CNC) have been advocating electoral reforms with a view to strengthen­ing democracy at various levels. Sadly, despite promises, political parties have not brought about the required changes in the Representation of Peoples’ Act (RPA). On May 2, 2002, the Supreme Court gave a historic ruling following public interest litigation by an NGO.

It ruled that every candidate, contesting an election to Parliament, State Legislatures or Municipal Corporation, has to declare the following along with the application for his/her candidature:

· A candidate’s criminal records (convictions, acquittals and charges etc)

· The candidate’s financial records (assets & liabilities etc)

· The candidate’s educational qualifications

If the candidate fails to file any of the above three declarations, the Returning Officer will have the right to reject his nomination papers. The Supreme Court has ruled that all the three declarations will have to be truthful.

The Election Commission had sent a notification on June 28, 2002, to all State Election Officers with a view to enforcing it.

The Supreme Court’s thrust has been that the people and the voters have the right to know about the candidate’s criminal record, assets and liabilities and educational qualifications.

The Returning Of­ficer has to publish these declarations for the voters’ knowledge and, surely, the people will get an opportunity to know about their candidate’s background.

As regards the financial aspect, if a candidate stated that he has assets worth Rs 500 crore or Rs 500, the Returning Officer could not disqualify him/her. If he furnished wrong details and were later detected by the Returning Officer, the latter could take a decision.

If the opposing candidate brought out a convincing document to prove that the declaration of his opponent is false, then the Returning Officer was within his rights to reject the nomination. If a candidate is illiterate, it could not become a reason for rejection of his/her nomination papers.