बेबाक · Editorial
দলত্যাগ বিরোধী আইন মেরামতের জন্য সুবিধার একত্রীকরণ এবং মামলা
একটি স্বল্প-পরিচিত আঞ্চলিক দলের সাথে কুড়ি জন সাংসদের সংযুক্তি দেখায় যে কীভাবে দুই-তৃতীয়াংশ ব্যতিক্রম সেই দলত্যাগের অনুমতি দিতে পারে যা এটি পরীক্ষা করার উদ্দেশ্যে করা হয়েছিল।
কৌশল
তৃণমূল কংগ্রেসের কুড়ি জন লোকসভা সাংসদ স্পিকারের কার্যালয়কে জানিয়েছেন যে তাঁদের দল হাওড়ায় নিবন্ধিত একটি স্বল্প-পরিচিত সংগঠন ন্যাশনালিস্ট সিটিজেন পার্টি অফ ইন্ডিয়ার সঙ্গে মিশে গেছে।
A law turned inside out
The anti-defection framework was designed to deter the trade in legislators, while leaving room for genuine collective realignment. That presumption is now doing work it was not meant to do. When representatives move into a little-known party, one that the reporting says built its Tripura campaign on a pledge to "Reject Political Turncoats", the exception risks swallowing the rule. The letter of the law may be invoked; its spirit is strained. This does not look like a loophole stumbled upon by chance. It looks like a manoeuvre engineered with care.
The case for dissent
The dissidents deserve their strongest defence. Elected members are not the property of a party machine; a representative who breaks with a leadership he believes has failed can claim to be exercising conscience, not committing fraud. If twenty members have genuinely concluded their platform is better served elsewhere, the merger route exists so that a real, collective realignment is not automatically treated as wrongdoing. The reported indication that the dissidents could still seek recognition as the "real" party when Parliament's monsoon session starts in July suggests a contest over political identity, not merely an instant transfer of loyalty. A democracy that forces members to vote against their judgment, on pain of disqualification, carries its own pathology.
The voter's mandate
And yet the voter must be heard, for the voter is the only sovereign here. Citizens did not elect twenty individuals in the abstract; they elected candidates presented under a party banner, and they are entitled to expect that the mandate they gave is not quietly rewritten between elections. When a bloc that entered the House under one banner promises support to the governing alliance and parks itself in another registered party for the time being, the elector's choice is put under strain. The irony is sharp, since the vehicle chosen once campaigned against turncoats. Conscience can explain a member crossing the floor and facing the consequences. It strains to explain twenty doing so together while seeking to avoid them.
The tell is the timing
The timing settles much of the matter. By the pack's count, approval of the merger would lift the NDA's strength in the Lok Sabha from 294 to 314, still 46 short of a two-thirds majority, and this bloc has promised support to the NDA. More telling, the merger may let these members vote before any ruling on disqualification, even as the Centre may bring the Delimitation Bill as early as the monsoon session of Parliament. A measure with large constitutional and political consequences may thus be decided in part by votes whose own status remains unresolved. When a merger's sequencing tracks the legislative calendar this closely, the claim of spontaneous conviction wears thin.
Time-bound the chair
The verdict is not against the members alone; it is against a system that rewards this conduct. The remedy is structural and overdue. Disqualification petitions cannot be left to ripen at the convenience of the calendar: their adjudication should be time-bound, decided within a fixed and short window, and insulated from the House's immediate political arithmetic. The merger exception itself needs revisiting, so that it cannot be used merely as a flag of convenience. Until then, the Speaker's office should rule on these petitions before any consequential vote, not after. A safeguard that protects the defector protects nothing.
ফ্লোর-ক্রসিংকে শাস্তি দেওয়ার জন্য নির্মিত একটি সুরক্ষা ব্যবস্থা এটির লাইসেন্স দেওয়ার জন্য ব্যবহার করা হচ্ছে।
আপনার সাংবিধানিক অধিকার
এই গল্পে সংবিধান কী নিশ্চয়তা দেয়Superintendence, direction and control of elections vests in an independent Election Commission of India.
ConstitutionalEvery citizen aged 18 or above has the right to vote, regardless of wealth, status, gender or education.
ConstitutionalEvery citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression — including a free press and the right to know — subject only to the reasonable restrictions in Article 19(2).
Fundamental RightThe State shall not deny any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws. Like must be treated alike; the law cannot be arbitrary.
Fundamental RightWhat this editorial rests on
Drawn from our live multi-newsroom feed — read the reporting at source.
আন্দোলনে যোগ দিন।
একবারে একটি নির্ভীক সম্পাদকীয়-আপনার ভাষায়। এছাড়াও সাংবিধানিক অনুরোধ অবশ্যই অনুসরণ করতে হবে।
An editorial is the considered opinion of The Mudda desk, argued from the sourced reporting above and written under our published persona, बेबाक. We name institutions and actors; we do not endorse or attack any political party. "The Mudda's Ask" is a citizen's good-faith policy proposal, grounded in the Constitution — not the platform of any party. Translations are faithful — no fact is added in any language. If we are wrong, we will say so. How we work →