6. Section 4 of this Bill explicitly states that irrespective of any court judgment or instruction of the EC, NO candidate shall be liable to disclose any information not required under this law or rules.
7. There is not even a murmur about the other Electoral Reforms that the government has been promising for long.

What does this law mean? 

1. This is meant essentially to  nullify the Supreme Court Judgment of May 2^nd and Election Commission order of June 28.
2. The ECs jurisdiction under Art 324 is sought to be nullified in respect of any disclosures in future.
3. The new disqualification is only for two separate charges framed for extremely grave offences, that too prior to six months before nomination, and only if such cases are not stayed by any competent court. In effect, this is a token attempt to give an impression that some genuine effort is being made to curb criminalization of politics. In reality, the net effect of this provision will be marginal at best.
4. There is no disclosure of any financial details. And if this law stands as it is, there is no possibility of future disclosures of candidate’s assets and liabilities.  
5. As pointed out earlier this Bill prohibits eliciting information even to enforce the existing provisions of the RP Act, 1951.

Questions

1. The Supreme Court’s judgment is in respect of the fundamental right to information, derived under Art 19 of the Constitution. Can the legislature abridge this fundamental right?
2. If the law does abridge this right is there a recourse to the Supreme Court?
3. Can people be denied information related to other charges framed and past convictions, when they are a matter of public record?
4. What happens if a candidate commits a second murder just a few months before the election and is charged with the offence by a competent court? Have we come to such a sorry pass that even for extremely grave offences, if charges are framed within six months prior to nomination, the candidate cannot be disqualified? And do we require two such separate offences to think of disqualifying a candidate? Is this a rehabilitation programme for hardened criminals?
5. Can a law prohibit the EC from exercising its legitimate jurisdiction under Art 324 from seeking information which is relevant to discharge of its duties under the law - for example, details of convictions which might disqualify a candidate?

What Can We Do Now?

1. We require to contact jurists to get their advice. Justice Rajender Sachar, Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Sri Sanjay Parikh and Ms. Pinky Anand should guide us about our legal options. I presume there is no recourse to litigation until this Bill becomes law. But we should study the issue and be ready.
2. Even at this late hour, if we should try and see if the EC can clarify that the RO will have no arbitrary powers or discretion under the order issued on June 28. That will help us get the support of many enlightened politicians and parties.
3. The public education campaign should continue. In particular, the media should be briefed about the implications of this Bill.
4. Whatever be the immediate outcome, the events of the past 10 weeks have certainly forced Electoral Reform to the center stage of our political discourse. We should now look at the whole reform agenda – particularly curbing polling irregularities, accountable use of money power and measures to enhance representational legitimacy and internal party democracy.
5. We need to emphatically dispel the notion that all reform efforts are anti political, and “elitist”. Our efforts are to cleanse political process, and strengthen democracy, and are undertaken with deep respect for liberty, and citizens’ sovereignty. We do not believe politicians are the villains. They are the victims of a vicious cycle. The political class needs to seize the national mood as an opportunity and not perceive it as a threat.
6. Irrespective of the outcome on legislative and legal fronts, informed and assertive citizenry can make disclosures through civil society initiatives and media support a reality. No law prevents us institutionalizing disclosures through citizens’ efforts. We should share experiences of citizens’ initiatives and standardize techniques of benchmarking and disclosures. 

Finally, the last few months are not a waste. We are much better off than we were a few months ago. Electoral Reform is now occupying center stage in public domain. The knee-jerk response of parties only helped mobilize public support for reform efforts. Media is taking up the issue of clean elections very seriously. Setbacks in short- term battles are inevitable. But the cause of democracy has received a great boost. If we act with clarity, conviction and a strategic sense, we may yet get full disclosures as a fundamental right, irrespective of any legislation. The battle has only just begun. 

Do please think over and give your considered responses. Friends in Delhi may get the legal advice quickly and advice us. 

With warm regards