Cross-Voting in Elections

Cross-voting in elections refers to a scenario where members of a political party or coalition vote against their party’s directives or candidate preferences. Read here to learn more about it.

The Rajya Sabha elections in the States of Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, and Karnataka witnessed cross-voting by MLAs belonging to different parties. This has once again raised concerns about the sanctity of the election process.

This phenomenon can occur in various forms of elections, including presidential, parliamentary, and local elections and in legislative votes on specific issues.

Cross-voting is often seen in systems that use secret ballots, making it easier for individuals to vote according to their personal preference rather than following the party line. This behavior can have significant implications for party unity, electoral outcomes, and the dynamics of political alliances.

Rajya Sabha elections

Following Article 80 of the Constitution, the elected members of each State’s Legislative Assembly serve as the indirect electors for each State’s Rajya Sabha Members.

• The Rajya Sabha polls will only be necessary if there are more candidates than there are seats available.
• Actually, until 1998, it was typically inevitable what would happen in the Rajya Sabha elections.
• In the past, candidates nominated by different parties were elected without facing opposition, based on their strength in the Assembly.

Nevertheless, cross-voting occurred during the Maharashtra Rajya Sabha elections in June 1998, which led to the defeat of a Congress party candidate.

The Representation of the People Act, of 1951 was amended in 2003 to prevent MLAs from engaging in this kind of cross-voting.

• The Act’s Section 59 was modified to stipulate that open ballot voting will be used for Rajya Sabha elections.
• Political party MLAs are expected to present their ballots to the party’s designated representative.
• Voting shall be void if the ballot paper is not shown to the authorized agent or any other person.
• It is forbidden for independent MLAs to display their ballots to third parties.

Causes of Cross-Voting

Several factors can lead to cross-voting in elections:

• Personal Beliefs: An individual may vote against their party’s choice if they disagree with the candidate’s ideology, ethics, or policies.
• Local Issues: Legislators might cross-vote to support policies or candidates that favor their constituency’s interests over their party’s agenda.
• Political Strategy: In some cases, cross-voting is a strategic move to undermine the party leadership or to realign with emerging power centers within or outside the party.
• Personal Ambitions: Political figures may cross-vote as a step towards establishing independence from their current party, often in anticipation of a switch to another party or to create a new political faction.

Tenth Schedule

In 1985, the Tenth Schedule of the 52nd Amendment to the Constitution brought in the “anti-defection” statute.

• According to this Schedule, a member of a State legislature or House of Parliament who willingly resigns from their political party or casts a vote in a House against the wishes of their party may be removed from the body. The party’s “whip” is the one who gives this voting order.

Nonetheless, the Rajya Sabha elections are not considered a Legislative Assembly procedure.

• The Election Commission released a clarification in July 2017, citing rulings from the Supreme Court.
• It said that in the event of a Rajya Sabha election, the Tenth Schedule’s rules about voting against the party’s instructions would not apply.
• Moreover, political parties are not permitted to give their members a “whip” during these elections.

Court’s ruling on cross-voting

The Supreme Court in Kuldip Nayar versus Union of India (2006), upheld the system of open ballot for Rajya Sabha elections.

• It reasoned that if secrecy becomes a source of corruption, then transparency can remove it.
• However, in the same case, the court held that an elected MLA of a political party would not face disqualification under the Tenth Schedule for voting against their party candidate. He/she may at the most attract disciplinary action from their political party.

The Supreme Court has also held in Ravi S. Naik and Sanjay Bandekar versus Union of India (1994), that voluntarily giving up membership under the Tenth Schedule is not synonymous with only formally resigning from the party to which the member belongs.

• The conduct of a member both inside and outside the house can be looked into to infer if it qualifies as voluntarily giving up membership.

It may be noted that the six Congress MLAs, who cross-voted in Himachal Pradesh, have been disqualified under the Tenth Schedule for defying the party whip and being absent during the passage of the Budget in the Assembly.

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court said that it would not permit the assault on democracy in the Chandigarh Mayoral election case.

• In the Rajya Sabha elections, cross-voting poses a major risk to democracy.
• As a result, the court may decide to take up this case on its own or when the Himachal Pradesh Speaker’s ruling disqualifying the six MLAs is finally brought before it on appeal.
• During that process, it can consider its ruling in the Ravi Naik case while evaluating its order in the Kuldip Nayar case.

Implications of Cross-Voting

Cross-voting can have various implications, depending on the context and scale:

• Impact on Party Unity: Frequent cross-voting may indicate deep divisions within a party, potentially leading to splits or the weakening of party discipline.
• Electoral Outcomes: In closely contested elections, cross-voting by a few members can change the outcome, especially in systems where a single vote can make a significant difference.
• Legislative Processes: Cross-voting in legislative bodies can lead to unexpected outcomes in law-making processes, affecting the passage of bills and the implementation of government policies.
• Political Careers: Individuals who engage in cross-voting may face repercussions from their party, including expulsion or being denied party support in future elections. Conversely, it can also enhance an individual’s reputation as an independent thinker, appealing to voters who value autonomy over strict party loyalty.

Way forward

The open ballot method for Rajya Sabha elections was affirmed by the court to preserve the greater ideal of free and fair elections and their integrity.

Nevertheless, the purpose of this process has been undermined by the occurrences of cross-voting throughout the past 10 years. Given that the ruling parties profit from such immoral strategies, it would be unrealistic to anticipate that the Constitution would be strengthened anymore or that legislation prohibiting such voting methods would be passed.

In an election for the Rajya Sabha, an MLA’s vote against their political party might be interpreted as a clear indication that they had willingly left the party.

This would be a legitimate reason for disqualification under the Tenth Schedule if the court finds it to be so. Hopefully, it would serve as a disincentive for future instances of this kind of cross-voting.

Conclusion

Cross-voting reflects the complex interplay between individual autonomy, party discipline, and democratic principles in the political process. While it can pose challenges to party unity and electoral strategies, it also highlights the importance of personal conviction and the dynamic nature of democratic governance. Understanding the causes and implications of cross-voting is crucial for political parties, candidates, and voters as they navigate the intricacies of electoral politics.

Read: Alternative voting methods in India

Click here for more polity notes.

-Article by Swathi Satish