Defection, often known as floor-crossing, is the transfer of allegiance by a legislator from one political party to another. It is common in all democracies. In fact, it is infamously known in India as Aaya Ram Gaya Ram (Ram has come, Ram has gone) – a term that originated in 1967 in Haryana when excessive political horse trading, counter horse trading, and counter-counter horse trading occurred, resulting in the dissolution of the Haryana Legislative Assembly and the holding of fresh elections in 1968.
After 1967, various political parties in India frequently continued to engage in this form of political horse-trading to gain power, and the issue of political defections became a national concern.
To combat this trend, the anti-defection law was enacted in 1985 to limit legislators’ proclivity to switch loyalties from one party to another, hence limiting the overthrow of administrations and the formation of new ones. And the Constitution’s Tenth Schedule became known as the anti-defection law.
However, during the past few decades, the anti-defection law has failed to provide stable administrations, has seriously harmed constitutional offices, and has made a mockery of our democracy.
With the rise of the Bharatiya Janata Party as the dominant political force in Indian politics since 2014, a plethora of defections from the politically weaker Congress party and other regional parties who joined the BJP at various stages over the years have helped to sustain the trend even in recent times.
One example is the 2019 Maharashtra state election, in which the BJP’s Devendra Fadnavis became chief minister for three days. He resigned after failing to win a majority, and a coalition of Shiv Sena, Nationalist Congress Party, and Congress created a government led by Shiv Sena’s Uddhav Thackeray. However, a party rebellion forced his resignation last year.
Meanwhile, in Nagaland, 21 NPF MLAs defected to the NDPP last April, transforming the state into an opposition-less government causing enormous damage to the basic ethos of democracy.
Political defections have long been associated with a contradictory ethical challenge in the practice of democratic politics. Switching to another party (typically a rival party) after winning an election under the flag of the previous party is widely regarded as political impropriety and opportunism.
However, the act of defection cannot be attributed solely to corrupt politics. It can be done purely for immediate political gain or ideological reasons, or to protect one’s political autonomy and uphold democratic and just ideals, as many defectors assert.
Having said that, it is definitely true that the process of defection has faced issues of political instability and electoral volatility in established democracies such as India, and it is evident that the anti-defection law has failed to solve the issue.
Apart from the immediate perceptible problems, a deeper investigation of the workings of the party structures and leadership style is required to unearth the fundamental elements that generate fertile grounds for defection. Only a consistent strategy will suffice in ushering positive reforms for improving the functioning of parties to such inevitable challenges in a democracy.