Context: 

The Supreme Court refused to set aside a provision in the election law that allows candidates to contest polls from two constituencies simultaneously. 

• The court chose to leave the issue to the wisdom of Parliament as it is a policy matter and an issue concerning political democracy. 

Section 33(7) of the Representation of People’s Act:

• Section 33(7) permits a candidate to contest any election (Parliamentary, State Assembly, Biennial Council, or bye-elections) from up to two constituencies.
• The provision was introduced in 1996 prior to which there was no bar on the number of constituencies from which a candidate could contest.

Stand of ECI:

• The EC has sought an amendment of Section 33(7) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 to restrict the number of seats a candidate can contest from.
• In 2004, too, the EC had proposed an amendment of Section 33(7).
• Alternative suggested by the Election commission:

• • The candidate contesting from two seats should bear the cost of the bye-election to the seat when the contestant decides to vacate in the event of his/her winning both seats.
  • The amount in such an event could be Rs 5 lakh for assembly election and Rs 10 lakh for parliament election. 

Arguments of the Government:

• It had argued that law cannot curtail the right of a candidate to contest elections and curtail the polity’s choice of candidates.
• The government had further told the Supreme Court that one candidate-one constituency restriction would require a legislative amendment and that the restriction to two constituencies was reasonable enough, and there was no need to change the law now.

Need to bar from contesting from more than one seat:

• One person, one vote & one candidate, one constituency is the dictum of democracy. However, as per the law, as it stands today, a person can contest the election for the same office from two constituencies simultaneously.
• When a candidate contests from two seats, it is imperative that he has to vacate one of the two seats if he wins both.
• This, apart from the consequent unavoidable financial burden on the public exchequer, government manpower and other resources for holding bye-election is also an injustice to the voters of the constituency which the candidate is quitting from.

 News Source: The Hindu