Political parties and the law: India

Select Language Afrikaans Albanian Arabic Armenian Azerbaijani Basque Belarusian Bulgarian Bengali Catalan Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Traditional) Croatian Czech Danish Dutch English Estonian Filipino Finnish French Galician Georgian German Greek Gujarati Haitian Creole Hebrew Hindi Hungarian Icelandic Indonesian Irish Italian Japanese Javanese Kannada Khmer Korean Latvian Lithuanian Macedonian Malay Maltese Marathi Nepali Norwegian Persian Polish Portuguese Punjabi Romanian Russian Serbian Slovak Slovenian Spanish Swahili Swedish Tamil Telugu Thai Turkish Ukrainian Urdu Vietnamese Welsh Yiddish

This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. Additional information may please be sent as messages to the Facebook community, Indpaedia.com. All information used will be gratefully acknowledged in your name.

Internal Matters

Courts Can’t Interfere: SC

Dhananjay Mahapatra, July 7, 2022: The Times of India

New Delhi: Frowning at the Madras HC’s intervention in the situation arising from factional feud in AIADMK, the Supreme Court said judiciary can’t assume jurisdiction to fix parameters for decision making on internal matters of a political party.


Unfettering the general council of AIADMK to decide what it deems fit in its July 11 meeting, a bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Krishna Murari said, “Can a court pass orders to a party on how it should conduct its meetings? Who wants to do what in a party is essentially a matter for the party. ”


The feud in the principal opposition party in Tamil Nadu had reached SC with Edapaddi K Palaniswamy challenging the June 23 order of a division bench of the Madras HC allowing rival O Panneerselvam the power to veto any resolution for single leadership in the party. The SC bench stayed the June 23 order.

Appearing for Palaniswamy, advocate CS Vaidyanathan said the Panneerselvam faction has moved the HC seeking initiation of contempt proceedings for alleged violation of HC or- ders during the June 23 meeting of the general council. He said the next meeting is fixed for July 11.

The Panneerselvam faction, through advocate Maninder Singh, accused the other faction of attempting to destabilise the party.

“Can we fix the boundaries for the general council? Is it within our jurisdiction? The party must work out its disputes within the party,” the bench said. “It’s necessary and expedient to stay the HC’s June 23 order in view of the other steps and proceedings (contempt) taken up or likely to be taken up pursuant to observations/ directions of the HC and in view of the questions raised in the present petition (by Palaniswamy). Meeting of general council of AIADMK on July 11 will proceed in accordance with law. . . The single judge of HC is free to proceed with issues pending before him,” it added.

Splits in political parties

EC’s criteria, 2022-23

July 6, 2023: The Times of India

SENA SYMBOL DECISION 


The Election Commission (EC) on Feb 17 recognised chief minister Eknath Shinde’s party faction as the real Shiv Sena and allotted the ‘bow & arrow’ poll symbol to it

CLAIMANTS

The Shiv Sena symbol was claimed by the party’s two rival factions led by Shinde and former chief minister Uddhav Thackeray

Stop-gap arrangement

|After the party split, the factions started using separate party names and symbols allotted to them by the EC after it froze the Shiv Sena name and party symbol till such time that it would decide the dispute

EC’S REASONING


In its order, the Election Commission said that Shiv Sena’s constitution, amended in 2018, was not on record of poll panel:

“The constitution of political parties ought to provide for free, fair and transparent elections to the posts of office bearers and a further free and fair procedure for the resolution of internal disputes. These procedures ought to be difficult to amend and should be amendable only after ensuring larger support of the organisational members for the same

“The Constitution of Shiv Sena, amended in 2018, is not given to EC. Amendments had undone the act of introducing democratic norms in the Party Constitution of 1999, brought by the Late Bal Thackeray at the insistence of EC

HOW DOES EC DECIDE

Usually, the first step in symbol disputes is exchanging the material put on record by either faction with the other faction

NCP’S CASE

Ajit faction, in its letter to EC staking claim to NCP party name and symbol, has reportedly claimed the support of 50 MLAs, MLCs and MPs

Sharad group has filed a caveat, requesting that no decision be taken by EC on Ajit’s plea without hearing its version, and informing about the expulsion of 9 MLAs by Sharad group

WHAT ELSE EC MAY CONSIDER

Organizational strength

| Number of office-bearers and functionaries on each side

Strength in legislature

| Number of MLAs and MLCs (in bicameral legislatures) on each side

Party constitution

|Organizational structure, mode of internal election and method of appointing office-bearers as enunciated