Supreme Court Criminalizes Vote Bank Politics

In a historic decision that might change political dynamics and ethos, and rattle the political fraternity of India forever, the Supreme Court (SC) on Monday passed a groundbreaking verdict making it criminal for politicians to appeal to the religious, casteist, racist, communal and lingual components of the Vote Bank, right ahead of the upcoming Assembly elections.

Heading a seven-judge bench, Chief Justice of India T S Thakur said that that the secular ethos of the Constitution of India could be upheld only by cleaving elections and religion.

"Beliefs are matters of individual preferences and choices, and is immoral for anyone to use them for political gains," he declared in a 4:3 majority verdict.

"The State is obliged to allow practicing and professing of religious faith that citizens follow, but can forbid interference of religions and religious beliefs with secular activities including elections," the Jury said. It added that elections can't be fought by making a pitch to candidates', opponents' or voters' religion, caste, creed, race, community or language.

The judgment said that the function of an elected representative must be secular in both outlook and practice.

"Religion has no role in electoral process which is a secular activity. Conflating religion and State power is not permissible while freedom to practice, profess and propagate religion of one's own choice is guaranteed. The State, being secular in character, will not identify itself with any one of the religions or its denominations," four of the Judges observed.

The verdict will have significant implications and ripple effects in States where religion and caste-based mobilization are the status quo. Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh and others are predicted to be affected.

However, three judges - Justices D Y Chandrachud, Adarsh Kumar Goel and Uday Umesh Lalit - argued that the view could be seen as prohibiting people from articulating legitimate concerns of voters and reducing democracy to an abstraction.

"No government is perfect. The Law doesn't prohibit dialogue or discussion of a matter which is concern to the voters," the dissenters said. Discussion and dialogue related to a voter's background is part of social mobilisation to bring marginalized groups into the mainstream, it said.

However four other judges - Justices M B Lokur, S A Bobde and L N Rao - said that secularism had to be considered while dealing with such issues, and vetoed the view of the three. And the final verdict was passed.

This verdict was passed while the court was revisiting a 20-year-old judgment that called Hinduism a way of life and said a candidate was not affected prejudicially if votes were sought on this plank. Several petitions filed over the years have challenged the verdict over the two decades. And the present crucial judgment came to pass as a result.

A few important questions still remain - whether seeking votes in the name of religion was a corrupt practice under the Representation of the People Act, and if candidates who indulge in the practice would and should be disqualified?

Later speaking to the media outside the court premises, most political party reps who were interviewed said that they were happy with the judgment. Chief Justice Thakur, who retired on Tuesday, also backed the majority view.

The Indian National Congress spokesperson said, "The Congress welcomes the Supreme Court's pragmatic judgment with regard to the political ethos and how they have come to be dominated by casteist and religious dynamics, especially by some Parties which have made these a part of their ideology to rise in Indian politics."

"This is a huge respite and will test the true potential of a politician. Vote Bank politics was supposed to be discouraged decades ago," the Communist Party of India said.