The Election Commission is now said to be pushing for an amendment in the Representation of the People Act in order to impose a ban on people from contesting polls from more than one seat. It has been learnt that in a recent meeting with the Legislative Secretary in the Law Ministry, Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar discussed this proposal.
The ECI has said that if such a bar cannot be imposed on candidates, then at least a hefty fine should be imposed on people who vacate one of the seats after winning in elections and force a bypoll.
It is not the first time that the poll panel is pushing for such a measure. The first push for this reform was made way back in 2004.
As per the existing electoral law, a candidate is allowed to file nominations from two different constituencies in a general election or a group of bye-elections or biennial elections. Since one individual is allowed to represent only one constituency in a legislative or parliamentary body, he/she has to vacate the other seat in case victories were registered on both seats.
Way back in 1996, the government had amended the Representation of the People Act to bar a person from contesting elections from more than two seats. Prior to the amendment, an individual was permitted to contest polls from as many seats as he wanted.
In 2004, the ECI proposed an amendment to certain sections of the Act so that a person cannot fight elections from more than one constituency at a time.
“However, in case the existing provisions are to be retained, a candidate contesting from two seats should bear the cost of the bye-election to the seat that the contestant decides to vacate in the event of him or her winning both seats,” a functionary said citing the proposal, as per news agency PTI.
At that time, the Commission had proposed a fine of Rs 5 lakh for the State Assembly and Legislative Council election and Rs 10 lakh for the Lok Sabha election. Now, the ECI believes a revision in the amount is required.
The Commission believes holding a bypoll in such cases leads to an unnecessary financial burden on the public exchequer. Further, it is also an injustice to the voters of the seat which the candidate is vacating.
