Context
Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that election candidates have a right to privacy and are not required to disclose every detail of their personal life and belongings to voters.
- Voters have the right to access information necessary for selecting the candidate they wish to vote for.
Voters Right To Know Vs Candidate’s Right to Privacy: Supreme Court Judgment
- Legal Clarification: A candidate’s decision to maintain privacy on matters irrelevant to voters or their candidacy is not considered a ‘corrupt practice’ under the Representation of People Act, 1951.
Enroll now for UPSC Online Course
(RPA) Representation of the People Act 1951
- It governs how elections are carried out.
- It outlines the requirements and restrictions for becoming a member of the houses.
- It includes measures to prevent corrupt behaviours and other crimes.
- It establishes the process for resolving uncertainties and disputes that arise from elections.
- Significance: It prohibits corrupt behaviours such as booth capturing, bribery, or inciting enmity, ensuring the fairness and integrity of elections.
|
- Non-disclosure Not a Significant Defect: The justices stated that such non-disclosure does not constitute a “defect of a substantial nature” under the Act.
- No compulsion to disclose all information: Candidates are not compelled to disclose every aspect of their life to voters for scrutiny at a time of declaring their assets during elections.
- SC clarified that candidates don’t need to disclose every small item of movable property, like clothes, shoes, or stationery, unless they hold significant value or reflect on the candidate’s lifestyle and candidacy.
- Assessment of Asset Disclosure: The court stated that each case must be evaluated individually to determine if the non-disclosure of significant assets constitutes a defect or not.
- Non Disclosure of luxurious items like Expensive watches: Not sharing details about luxurious items would be considered a substantial defect.
- Non Disclosure Inexpensive Items: If a candidate and their family own simple, inexpensive assets such as simple watches, omitting their value may not be seen as a problem.
- Objective of Disclosure of assets: As per SC judgment, The candidates’ declaration of assets aimed to promote democratic participation among citizens and empower voters with information to make informed and thoughtful voting decisions.
Right to Privacy
- There is no specific provision for this right in the constitution.
- However, The extension of Article 21 – the right to life and liberty covers all these areas.
- It safeguards the individual’s personal space from both State and non-State actors.
- It allows individuals to make life decisions without external interference.
|
Previous Legal Case Overview
- The legal case is from Arunachal Pradesh where MLA Karikho Kri challenged a Gauhati High Court decision for voiding his election to the 44-Tezu Assembly Constituency.
- Kri had won the elections on May 23, 2019, as an Independent candidate.
- The Gauhati High Court ruled against Kri for not declaring three vehicles as assets in his election affidavit filed in Form No 26 appended to the Conduct of Elections Rules 1961.
- The vehicles in question were a Kinetic Zing Scooty, a Maruti Omni van used as an ambulance, and a TVS Star City motorcycle.
- The scooter was sold as scrap in 2009, and the other two vehicles were also sold. However, the High Court did not review the buyers’ statements.
- Supreme Court Decision in this case The Supreme Court sided with Kri, stating that once sold, vehicles cannot be considered assets of the candidate.
- Non-disclosure of these vehicles cannot be seen as an attempt on his [Kri] part to influence voters improperly.
- Therefore, the omission of the three vehicles from disclosure does not constitute a violation of Section 123(2) [corrupt practices] of the Act of 1951.
Section 123(2) [corrupt practices] of the Act of 195
- Section 123(2) deals with undue influence, which occurs when a candidate interferes, directly or indirectly, with voters’ ability to freely exercise their electoral rights.
- This interference can include threats of harm, social isolation, or expulsion from a caste or community.
|
|
Other Corrupt Practices Under the Representation of People Act 1951
- Section 123 of the Act: It outlines corrupt practices, including bribery, undue influence, spreading false information, and inciting enmity.
- Section 123(3): It prohibits candidates from using their race, caste, community, or language to gain votes.
- Section 123(4): It expands the definition of corrupt practices to include intentionally spreading false statements that could affect the outcome of the election.
Enroll now for UPSC Online Classes
According to the Representation of People Act 1951, An Elected Representative Can Lose their Position For
- Being convicted of certain offenses.
- Involvement in corrupt practices.
- Failing to declare election expenses.
- Having interests in government contracts or works.
Also Read: Supreme Court Observation on Movable Asset Declaration by Election Candidates
April 13, 2024
