Abolish the 10th Schedule: Singhvi’s Call for Defectors to Vacate Their Seats

When you hear the phrase “anti‑defection law”, you might picture a stern guardian of parliamentary integrity. In practice, however, the 10th Schedule of the Indian Constitution has, according to many, turned into a paper‑thin shield that fails to stop party‑hopping after elections. That very point was hammered home yesterday by veteran politician and constitutional scholar Gopal Singhvi, who called the law a “farce” and urged any legislator who has defected to resign immediately.

Singhvi, who spent three decades in Parliament and later served as a legal advisor to successive governments, did not mince words. “We built the anti‑defection law to preserve the sanctity of the people’s mandate. Instead, it has become a loophole that parties exploit, and legislators abuse,” he said, pausing for effect before adding, “If you crossed the floor, you owe it to your constituents to step down and let them choose again.”

The 10th Schedule, enacted in 1985 after a series of high‑profile defections, was intended to curb opportunistic party‑switching by disqualifying members who abandoned the party on whose ticket they were elected. Over the years, however, strategic resignations, mass defections under the banner of “merger”, and clever legal interpretations have eroded its potency.

Singhvi’s remarks came amid a spate of recent defections that have shaken the balance of power in several state assemblies. In Karnataka, a handful of MLAs jumped ship to the opposition, prompting a scramble for votes in the upcoming confidence motion. In West Bengal, the exodus of a senior minister sparked rumours of a broader realignment. These incidents, he argued, are not isolated glitches but symptoms of a deeper malaise.

“It’s not enough to merely punish a few wayward members after the fact,” Singhvi continued. “We need to restore faith in our democratic process. The only credible way is to scrap the current 10th Schedule and replace it with a robust, transparent mechanism that truly binds elected representatives to the mandate they received.”

His call for abolition is bold, but not without precedent. Legal scholars have long debated whether the anti‑defection provision infringes on the fundamental right to freedom of association. Moreover, the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Ravi S. Shukla vs. Union of India hinted that the law could be revisited if it consistently fails its purpose.

Critics, however, warn that dismantling the schedule without a solid alternative could plunge the nation into political instability. “We must be careful not to open a Pandora’s box,” cautioned political analyst Dr. Meera Nair. “A well‑crafted reform is essential; otherwise, we risk encouraging even more rampant defections.”

Singhvi, aware of the delicate balance, proposed a two‑step roadmap: first, an immediate resignation clause for any member who changes party affiliation after election; second, a comprehensive review committee comprising former judges, senior parliamentarians, and constitutional experts to draft a new anti‑defection framework.

He also appealed to the electorate, urging citizens to hold their representatives accountable. “Democracy lives in the people’s hands,” he said, eyes glinting. “If lawmakers think they can jump ships without consequence, they have fundamentally misunderstood the trust voters placed in them.”

The statements have already stirred debate in the Lok Sabha, with opposition leaders echoing Singhvi’s frustrations and the ruling party urging caution. Whether the 10th Schedule will be scrapped or merely patched up remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the conversation about the health of India’s parliamentary democracy has been reignited.

As the political drama unfolds, Singhvi’s plea serves as a reminder that laws, however well‑intentioned, must evolve with the times—or risk becoming, as he put it, a “farce”. For now, all eyes are on the upcoming parliamentary committee and the possible reforms that could reshape the way India handles defections forever.