~ This post has been authored by Sushmitha Keren.
1. Introduction
Our country is a democracy, and the election of its leaders is a matter of serious concern. In India, there has been a troubling trend over the years where individuals involved in criminal cases are allowed to contest elections. Since 2004, the number of people with criminal backgrounds entering politics and becoming ministers has increased alarmingly, turning this into a dangerous pattern. This poses a grave threat to the integrity of our nation and its governance. The rise of criminals in positions of power undermines the very foundation of democracy and must be addressed urgently.
2. Criminalization in Politics: An Alarming Trend[1]
In the 2024 Indian Lok Sabha elections, the presence of criminal cases among elected MPs reached a concerning level. According to multiple reports, nearly 46% of the newly elected members of parliamenthave declared criminal cases against them. Out of the 543 MPs, 251 face such cases, and 31% of these involve serious charges like murder, attempted murder, rape, and kidnapping. Despite Supreme Court guidelines that mandate political parties to publicize candidates’ criminal records.
Cabinet Ministers (2004-2024) with Criminal Cases:[2]
| Lok Sabha Election Year | Number of MPs/Winning Candidates Analysed | Number of MPs/Winning Candidates with Declared Criminal Cases | Percentage of MPs/Winning Candidates with Declared Criminal Cases | Number of MPs/Winning Candidates with Declared Serious Criminal Cases | Percentage of MPs/Winning Candidates with Declared Serious Criminal Cases |
| 2009 | 543 | 162 | 30% | 76 | 14% |
| 2014 | 542 | 185 | 34% | 112 | 21% |
| 2019 | 539 | 233 | 43% | 159 | 29% |
| 2024 | 543 | 257 | 46% | 170 | 31% |
3. Impact on Governance and Democracy
If criminals themselves hold positions of power, responsible for making and shaping laws, how can we expect them to enact laws that would curb their influence or bring justice to the system? It is unrealistic to assume that those benefiting from a flawed system would voluntarily draft and pass laws that would restrict or punish their actions. The very integrity of governance is compromised when individuals with criminal backgrounds occupy positions of authority, as they are unlikely to legislate in a way that threatens their power or accountability. The urgent need for reform must be recognized, but true change cannot come from within a system dominated by those with vested interests in its dysfunction.
Several committees have been established over the years to regulate and reform the Election Commission of India (ECI). These include:
1. Election Commission of India (ECI)
2. Law Commission of India
3. Vohra Committee (1993)
4. National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) (2000)
5. Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) (2005-2009)
6. Indrajit Gupta Committee (1998)
7. Justice J.S. Verma Committee (2013)
Committees are frequently formed, and policies are drafted with the intent of reform, yet only selective policies are implemented—primarily those that allow criminal politicians to evade accountability. This selective approach raises a critical question: why are these committees created in the first place if their core recommendations are ignored? The government’s consistent failure to act on comprehensive reforms not only undermines the purpose of these committees but also wastes valuable time, resources, and public funds. It appears that these bodies are more a façade of action rather than genuine instruments of change, serving the interests of those in power rather than delivering justice or transparency. However, despite the recommendations and insights provided by these committees, their proposals have not been fully implemented. The failure to take these into serious consideration raises concerns about the commitment to electoral reform and the need for stronger measures to enhance the credibility, transparency, and effectiveness of the Election Commission. It is crucial that these reforms, which have been long overdue, be revisited with the urgency and seriousness they demand.
To prevent individuals with criminal backgrounds from holding positions of power, several legal reforms and regulations should be introduced. Some key measures include:
3.1 Amendment to the Representation of the People Act, 1951
At present, Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, disqualifies only convicted individuals from contesting elections. This loophole allows those facing serious criminal charges, but not yet convicted, to continue their political careers, undermining the integrity of our democracy.
The law should be amended to disqualify candidates who have more than two cases of serious offences pending against them, regardless of conviction status. These offences could include crimes against corpus crime against state involving violence, corruption, or threats to national security. Such individuals should be barred from contesting elections until proven innocent by the courts.
This is essential to prevent those with wealth and power from exploiting the system to delay legal proceedings. The current system allows them to manipulate the judiciary, evade justice, and continue to contest elections while their criminal cases pile up. Strict laws must be enforced to stop such abuse, ensuring that those who commit serious crimes face consequences before they can stand for public office. A democracy cannot afford to have its leaders shielded from justice by wealth or influence.
3.2 Special Courts for Politicians’ Criminal Cases
Once the election date is announced, the records of all cabinet ministers should be made public, ensuring that voters are fully informed about the leaders they are choosing. If a minister has any criminal cases pending, a fast-track trial must be conducted within 90 days in special courts designated for such cases. This swift legal process will determine whether the minister is convicted or acquitted. Based on the outcome, the individual should either be allowed to contest the election or be barred from participating. This ensures that only those with clean records can hold positions of power and trust in the government.
3.3 Lifetime Ban for Convicted Politicians
There must be a permanent ban on convicted politicians, preventing them from ever contesting elections or holding any public office if convicted of serious offences. Those found guilty of crimes that betray the public trust should be barred for life from representing the people or making decisions that impact the nation. Laws and regulations must be enacted to ensure that convicted individuals cannot use their influence or resources to return to positions of power. The integrity of our democracy demands nothing less.
4. Conclusion
The growing presence of criminals in political positions represents a grave threat to the very foundations of Indian democracy. Immediate and decisive reforms are not just necessary but imperative to confront this menace and restore public trust in the political system. Implementing these long-overdue changes will be a bold step towards safeguarding democracy, ensuring that only those with the highest standards of accountability and integrity hold positions of power. Anything less is a betrayal of the people’s mandate and the principles upon which the nation was built.
[1] The New Indian Express, https://www.newindianexpress.com.
[2] Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR)