Abstract

In the Indian democratic system, the Anti-Defection Law is extremely important. Despite the Anti-Defection rules being implemented, political defections continue in India, raising concerns about the effectiveness of these rules in maintaining political stability and deterring elected officials from acting opportunistically. The Anti-Defection Law, which was passed with the goal of preventing defection and keeping party discipline, has unexpected repercussions. Opponents argue that by restricting the ability to vote for representatives in government and making it more challenging to establish stable administrations, it erodes democracy. Furthermore, it has been said that political parties are encouraging a culture of insider trading and horse trading by using threats and inducements. Even though the 10th schedule spells out the disqualification laws in their entirety, there are still a number of important issues that come up from time to time, such as whether the Anti-Defection Law is constitutional, whether a speaker’s decision-making abilities can be contested, and whether intra-party conflicts are also grounds for disqualification. In order to address each of these queries, the paper presents arguments both in support of and against the legal question, concluding with the author’s summary of the findings. This paper will explore how to comprehend the practical legal nuances around anti-defection laws. It will also help the reader comprehend the Anti-Defection Law’s moral and logical foundation. This paper covers contentions for and against the Anti-Defection Law along with the changes required in the current system. This paper aims at providing a wholesome view of the Anti-Defection Law in the nation along with its subsequent implications.

Keywords