Click Here

Click on the link below to participate in the debate. As always, our views team will be jumping in from time to time to respond to your comments and questions.

Click Here

Click Here

Click Here

Click Here

Click Here

Click Here

Andhra Pradesh will see both state and general elections simultaneously.

Telangana is one of the three regions the state is divided into. It comprises 10 districts, including state capital Hyderabad. The region accounts for 119 of the state’s 294 assembly seats and 17 of 42 Lok Sabha seats. The demand for statehood is often used by regional, and even national parties, as a political issue. There is a widespread belief that statehood guarantees development.

Actor-politician Chiranjeevi’s Praja Rajyam took the lead in supporting the demand for Telangana’s statehood in August. In October, Telugu Desam Party (TDP), the state’s main opposition party that had opposed the demand for statehood, did a volte-face.

Then came a chorus of similar voices. In November, the Bharatiya Janata Party, or BJP, promised it would carve out a separate state within 100 days of coming to power.

It was in January 2008, that the Communist Party of India (CPI) had backed the demand for Telangana state. However, the Communist Party of India (Marxist), or CPM, is firm on its stand against smaller states.

Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS), spearheading the movement for statehood, has joined the TDP, CPI and CPM to form a so-called Grand Alliance (Maha Kootami) against the ruling Congress. The TRS, which was an ally of Congress in 2004, won 26 assembly and five Lok Sabha seats. It joined the Congress-led coalition governments both in the state and centre. However, it subsequently accused the Congress of going back on its promise for a separate state and pulled out of both governments.

Even the Congress would appear to be blinking. Last month, chief minister Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy suggested the creation of a constitutional body to assess the backwardness of Telangana region and take measures to improve it, but analysts see this as a move to calm dissidents within the party who support the case for Telangana’s statehood.

Uppunuthula Purushottam Reddy, a member of the Congress and chairman of the Telangana Planning and Development Board formed by the government in May 2007, said statehood is a prerequisite for development.

Chief minister Reddy had repeatedly said his government is keen to develop the region. Insisting that the constitutional committee would deliberate on the issues and concerns, he said further steps could be taken after the committee submitted its report.

“Absence of clarity on the demand for statehood to Telangana is definitely a cause of concern among Congress cadres in the region, especially when all the other parties in the state are supporting Telangana now, including TDP,” said B. Kamalakar Rao, member of legislative council and spokesperson for the Congress in the state.
However, he claimed the lack of unity among the members of Grand Alliance on seat sharing in the ensuing elections and the fact that CPM is opposed to formation of small states would only work in favour of the Congress. “There should be no problem for at least 50 Congress contestants out of 119 assembly seats in the Telangana region, who have been known as strong protagonists for the cause of Telangana. Same is the case with candidates from other parties. Irrespective of which party they belong to, only those known for their sincerity towards statehood to Telangana will get elected,” said Rao.

One analyst isn’t convinced. “Telangana is just one of many issues over which Congress cadres are finding difficult to face (the) public, the other issues being allegations of rampant corruption, rising prices of essential commodities, poor medical and education facilities in rural areas and lack of connectivity to villages,” said C. Narasimha Rao, a political analyst.

C.R. Sukumar

BSP plans to contest in 500 of the 543 Lok Sabha constituencies in the five-phase general election that starts on 16 April.

To be sure, a similar approach in 2004 didn’t help the party much in terms of the number of representatives it sent to Parliament. That year, it won 19 of the 435 seats it contested, all in Uttar Pradesh, the same state where the party was elected to power three years later, in 2007.

“In the beginning, there was a similar situation in Uttar Pradesh, wherein many people taunted the party saying that it could not win a single seat despite fielding so many candidates. But then through the years, the party gained and now has a sizeable vote share,” said Chander Bhan Prasad, a Dalit activist.

The BJP plans to field candidates in 430 constituencies. The Congress didn’t comment specifically on whether it would field more than 500 candidates. “As of now, we are fielding around 400 candidates. But the final lists are yet to be released,” said Tom Vadakkan, secretary, All India Congress Committee (AICC).

A BJP spokesperson said that in a democracy, “every party has a right to field as many number of candidates that they want to. While our allies and friends will be contesting on around 100 seats, BJP will be fielding candidates on the remaining seats”.

BSP’s numbers game would seem to be working if recent state elections are any indication.

According to a study by Marketing and Development Associates (MDRA), a New Delhi-based research consultancy, the party’s vote share rose from 4.5% to 6.5% in Chhattisgarh; 4.8% to 11% in Madhya Pradesh; 2.5% to 14% in Delhi; and from 3.2% to 7.6% in Rajasthan. While the later figures are based on the November 2008 assembly elections in these states, the earlier ones are based on the 2004 general election.

Praveen Rai, a psephologist with the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, said the BSP could be a significant player in these states. “They may be able to influence 10-15 seats in all, from constituencies based in these states.”

According to Prasad, the BSP spent most of the past decade focusing on its growth within Uttar Pradesh. “Now this really is the time for the party to spread its wings.”

“The idea is to make our presence felt and make an impact in as many constituencies as possible,” said a senior leader of BSP, who did not want to be identified.

That will start happening now, but the real difference will be in the next election, said a psephologist.

According to Mahesh Rangarajan, BSP’s aim is to take its vote share to around 10%. “It is very likely that they will substantially raise their vote share and there is a good chance that BSP will emerge as the third largest party in the coming elections.” The real election for the party, however, “would be the next one”, he added.

However, political opponents do not think BSP’s strategy will work.
“They will not be able to make any significant impact in any state outside Uttar Pradesh. Fielding a large number of candidates is something that any party can do,” said B.K. Hariprasad, a general secretary with AICC, and Congress spokesperson Manish Tiwari added that the number of candidates fielded by a political party is no measure of its prospects.

A BSP leader from Kerala, A. Neela Lohithadasan Nadar, said that the main message the party plans to take to the people is the projection of Mayawati, the party’s chief and the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, as India’s prime minister. “We are also telling the people that both the Congress as well as the Left have failed to bring development to the state. We hope to win more than one seat,” added Nadar.

However, the party’s expansion drive has also raised questions about how it is able to fund election campaigns across the country.
“There is absolutely no transparency on how the political parties, including BSP, are funding the elections. When you ask the parties as to how they are able to support their campaigns with just voluntary contributions, they say that the candidates also share the burden. But it is impossible to trace the expenditure on the field to the money raised by the parties,” said Jagdish Chokker of activist group Association for Democratic Reforms.

K.P. Narayana Kumar

Utpal Bhaskar contributed to this story.

According to legal experts, the apex court’s order is significant and could deny convicted politicians the opportunity to seek temporary stays from courts, enabling them to contest elections. This is because the existing law prohibits convicted criminals with a minimum sentence of two years from contesting elections.

The focus will now shift to candidates who have been convicted and are yet to serve their sentence because they are appealing their punishment in one court or another. Mint couldn’t immediately ascertain the number of such candidates contesting the general election that begins on 16 April.

People who have been convicted and have served their sentence, however, are free to contest the election six years after their release. Still, the court’s ruling on Monday will affect the electoral aspirations of some.

Senior counsel Sushil Kumar said similar cases could also be rejected by courts on the same principle. “People who are involved in criminal cases should have their cases decided first and then rush to do public service with a clean image.”

He added that the disqualification clause applies only to those who have been convicted by courts’ orders. “There is no limitation on undertrials who can contest from jail,” he said.

Senior counsel Majid Memon said the order “sends a signal to the Indian democracy that we need a cleaner Parliament and minimization of criminalization”.

Jagdeep Chhokar, founder member, Association for Democratic Reforms, a non-governmental organization that works towards improving and strengthening democracy and governance in India, said, “Barring any candidate convicted by law from fighting elections is a good step. One cannot predict what courts in future would do in the context of the Supreme Court verdict on Sanjay Dutt. However, any law declared by the Supreme Court is the law of the land and should be binding on other courts. But even then, at this point, one cannot say whether this is really it (the beginning of the end of criminalization in Indian politics).”

In 2006, Dutt was convicted under the Arm’s Act and sentenced to six years imprisonment by a special court. He appealed to the Supreme Court in 2007 and sought a suspension of his sentence. In March, he approached the court for further relief seeking a stay on his conviction so he could contest the polls as an SP candidate.
Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act bars individuals convicted for crimes that attract sentences that are more than two years from contesting elections. Its sub-section 4, however, says that for incumbent members of Parliament the disqualification starts three months from the date of conviction to allow them to file an appeal. After filing an appeal, the sitting representative is not disqualified from contesting elections till the case is decided by the court.

In 2007, the Supreme Court stayed the conviction of former cricketer Navjot Singh Sidhu, who is now a member of Parliament representing the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The bench mentioned that the same principle could not be applied in this case as unlike Dutt, Sidhu was a sitting member of Parliament when he was convicted. It added that Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code under which courts can grant stays on criminal conviction, can only be applied “under rare circumstances” .

“We do not think this is a fit case for suspension of conviction,” said Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan who delivered the verdict on behalf of a three-judge bench.

Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan said while the Dutt judgement is “significant”, “the Sidhu judgement has to be explained” by the courts. “There should be clarity on what sort of cases are rarest of rare cases so courts can suspend convictions. Sometimes innocent people are prosecuted due to a mistake of fact or law and later an appellate court says he is innocent. Whatever it is, the election process must be uniform and predictable. If a conviction cannot be suspended in any situation it needs to be explained.”

Both the Congress and the BJP welcomed the apex court decision. “Our decision not to field a candidate was solely due to our respect to his late father (Sunil Dutt),” Congress spokesperson Ashwini Kumar said.

BJP leader Arun Jaitley said: “We believe that the popular confidence in democracy and electoral system will be strengthened as a result of this judgement.”

Liz Mathew and Ruhi Tewari contributed to this story.

Malathi Nayak