How to resolved symbol row in ruling political party


In ruling State Political party, there is a splinter majority group of  Legislative assembly members, that formed the government, and who are now climing the symbol of their original political party name and symbol, which is being strongly resisted by their former party members and MLAs, who were ousted from formation of new Government of the same party. There is no defections and what they are fighting is for their party symbol among the two splinter group of the same party. How this symbol row can be resolved? 

 
Reply   
 
Advocate

Perhaps the most misuse provisions in the Constitution is the tenth schedule under the guise of whip master, which reduced the status of elected members to political slave, by taking out the whip master of the political party. Democracy is based on collective wisdom of political party, but this does not mean that elected member is expected to function like a robot, without any voice in any decisions making of the party, which will virtually drive the democratic political party to that of Hitler democracy. I am not saying this with any disdain towards any leader, but experience shows that on several occasions this has been unreasonably resorted to by the minority group against their own party members, even when they were reduced to minority in their own political party, leading to endless legal battle for years and years, only to conclude the legal battle just before the election. This requires a fresh look for healthy democratic process, by clipping the wings of whip master, in certain circumstances.

In democracy such symbol row emerged in state or national political party, which are basically rooted to leadership/policy row. In such a case the EC is the sole Constitutional authority to resolve the issue between the splinter group trying to take control of the party symbol. The EC while resolving such issue will consider the party’s constitution and the list of office bearers while the party was united. While doing so, the EC will take into consideration of delegates that support the rival claimant from amongst the organizational wing, and for the legislative wing the party goes by the number of MPs and MLAs to ascertain where they stand. This criterion for EC has been laid down by the magnificent judgment of Supreme Court in 1972.

In case there is no clear majority the EC will freeze the party’s symbol with liberty for the groups to register themselves as register unrecognized political party if election is in the offing or add prefixes or suffixes to the party’s existing names like congress ‘J’ and congress ‘O’. In the event of party reunion the EC is empower to restore the symbol and name of the original party. In India we have experience such row of almost all the major political party, are you referring to latest row of  Nitish Kumar JD-U, and Sharad Yadav.

 

 
Reply   
 



Thanks N.K.Assumi, but there was no tenth schedule in 1972, so how that judgment will apply to my query?

 
Reply   
 
Consultant

Irrespective of whether Schedule Ten existed or not in 1972, your question does not also pertain to the position of the party pertaining to the year 1972.

However, if you don't mind, can I know in which capacity you have raised this question?

 

 
Reply   
 

JIGYASU, as LCI member, and  also I am working on this constitutional topic as my project assignment. I have gone through many judgmet passed by the Election Commission but I was not clear on the intra party symbol dispute. Thanks JIGYASU. 

 
Reply   
 
Consultant

@ Sycorax Juris,

I don't think any academic project would require to provide court like judgment, as a solution of your research assignment.

 
Reply   
 
Consultant & Legal Analyst

Dear Sycorax Juris,

In agreement with the observation of Mr. Jigyasu, I may add that solution to any problem can differ in different situations as per the character and nature of the project. There are different methods of solving any problem, like in academic style for an academic problem, legal provisions and logics for the issues pertain to some real legal problem, general information for the purpose of satisfying the need to ensure knowhow about the issues, etc.

If you are really working on some project assignment, you should have introduced yourself along with the topic headlines, the academic standard, i.e., Master or PhD level for which the knowledge was desired with specific reference to the aims and object of research as well as the specific research question to be satisfied by the desired research.

So, I also feel that any project would not require solution to the tangle of the intellectual property in a court like jusgment without any trial in the case. Even moot court exercise may require extensive argulents and logics in favour or against the issues, which cannot be possible to be provided in just a few words.

More so, wherefrom and in what context the issue of the former party merbers arise and with what of their right about the party symbol?

So, on the whole, even your academic query is not fully illustrated to help anyone to solve your project/ assignment related problem.

 

 

 
Reply   
 

Respected Seniors, project work based on real life political drama with intra party discord over party symbol, trying to take control by each of the two groups of the same party. For certain reasons I am not devulging the state where it occured to avoid further controversies to the political crisis griping the state like a Python. This is no joke, and I guess this problems is coumpounded by the law itself. Consider this, can a group of minority legislative members expelled their own legislative party members having absolute majority? or the same majority members expelled the minority members who are trying to take control of the party symbol? In this scenario can any one say that either of the group has voluntarily given up their membership of such political party? absolutely NO.

This political crisis can be compared to  Issabela of Castillay Leon now Spain. In 1469  Issabela of Castillay Leon (Spain) had two suitors, the suitor of Aragaon (Cattalonia)  and the suitor  of portugal, and Issabela choose the suitor from Aragaon now Catalonia. Can any one say that the portugal suitor voluntarily gives up his love for Issabella? In the present political criis, does the tenth schedule apply to either of the group? or the conclusion can be arrived at by the EC, that is the crust of the matters. Thanks to all. 

 
Reply   
 
Consultant & Legal Analyst

I have already stated, what can or cannot be the requirement of your project. But since you are trying to stretch the thread to an unknown direction that too without discussing the real background of the case and the purpose of research. More so, you have brought forward some unrelated Spanish actors to the scene, which are a history in the oblivion.

However, can you please clarify, why you want to get solution to your riddle without discussing any aim and object of your assignment along with the research question in the absence of any background?

However, if you really want suitable research on your topic, you may better get the help from your own officially appointed academic project direcor or hire services of some external guide to help you accomplish your project in a systematic way that adding information in a tit bit manner.

 

 

 
Reply   
 
Advocate

sycorax.juris, in addition to Sir.Dhingra, suitable metaphor for you is child custody battle between divorce husband and wife, in your case is, which of the group will be the right group to lead the party to the State election.Unless there is reunion, the stronger group should take control of the party symbol with the order of the EC.

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

Search Forum:








×

  LAWyersclubindia Menu

web analytics