The Anti-Defection Law’s merger provision has come under renewed focus after former MPs cited it to avoid disqualification, raising questions about constitutional validity.

BulletsIn

• The Anti-Defection Law was introduced through the 52nd Constitutional Amendment in 1985 to curb political defections and strengthen stability in legislatures.
• The law inserted the Tenth Schedule into the Constitution and sought to end frequent party-switching practices that often destabilized elected governments.
• Members can be disqualified for voluntarily leaving their party, violating the party whip, or joining another political party after election.
• The 91st Constitutional Amendment of 2003 removed the split provision and retained only the merger clause as an exception to disqualification.
• Under the merger clause, at least two-thirds of legislators must support a merger, and the original political party must formally merge first.
• The Supreme Court in the Subhash Desai judgment clarified that legislators alone cannot claim a valid merger without action by the original political party.
• Concerns remain over misuse of the merger provision, delayed decisions by presiding officers, political bias, and weakening of representative democracy.
• Experts and judicial bodies have recommended independent tribunals, fixed timelines, limited whip usage, and stricter merger rules to strengthen the law.