India is the largest democracy in the world. Democracy as a system and political ideology refers to governance by all the people or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives. Democracy entails a system in which the eligible voters elect a representative from among themselves and elevate them to the position of power who in turn legislate the electors.
Article 84 and Article 173 of the Indian constitution deal with qualifications required to be a Member of Parliament and State legislatures respectively while Article 102 and Article 191 allude the disqualifications respectively. It also empowers parliament to legislate on the issue of qualification and disqualifications of electoral candidates, “such other qualifications as may be prescribed in that behalf by or under any law made by Parliament.[1]” However, there are no provisions for educational qualifications for MPs and MLAs. Ambedkar, during the constituent assembly debate on the issue of educational qualifications said, “I think that is a matter which might as well be left to the Legislatures. If the Legislatures at the time of prescribing qualifications feel that literacy qualification is a necessary one, I no doubt think that they will do it.[2]”
Now, the question, whether provision of minimum educational qualifications should be made mandatory inter alia mentioned in article 84 and 173, presents itself. Two major flaws of the scheme are discussed further.
Literacy:
At the time of independence, the literacy rate of India was 12%. At that point, the framers of the constitution did not feel the need to include educational qualifications under articles 84 and 173. According to the latest Indian census report of 2011, the literacy rate of India has increased marginally to 74.04%. After 67 years of independence, in 2014, Rajasthan legislature passed an ordinance making minimum educational qualification compulsory for elections to Panhayati Raj institutions. In 2015, state of Haryana followed the trail. This however, on a glance seems reasonable but on critical assaying, the faults seem poignant. The rural literacy rate of India is 62.80% which manifests that 37.92% of the Indian rural population is illiterate. Literacy rate of Indian rural female is at low 52.60%[3]. If such ordinances are legislated, it would render nearly half (47.8%) of the Indian rural women ineligible for contesting election which is a severe blow on the facets of democracy that the Assembly has adopted with abundant faith in common man of the nation.
Violative of Article 14:
Introduction of provisions of educational qualifications is against the concept of suffrage and democracy that the framers meant to write into the Constitution[4]. It is also violative of Article 14 of the Indian constitution which enshrines the principle of equality before law, “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India[5]”. Article 14 permits reasonable classification but prohibits class legislation. Supreme Court in Rajbala v. State of Haryana[6] upheld the Haryana Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Bill, 2015 citing reasonable classification. For reasonable classification there should be a reasonable nexus between the intelligible differentia and the object to be achieved by this classification. The ordinances were promulgated with the view to increase literacy and popularize education among rural population of the respective states. It was contended that there existed a reasonable nexus between the intelligible differentia and the object. On close examination of judgment, it is believed to have created a class: A class of educated persons among educated persons. A person with graduation degree is also educated and a person with the 5th grade qualification is also educated. Class legislation is violative of article 14. A class is denied equal opportunity before law. His legal right to contest election is being infringed.
The court held educational qualifications directly linked with effective disposal of functions, “It is only education which gives a human being the power to discriminate between right and wrong, good and bad”[7]. There is no reasonable nexus between the intelligible differentia and the object sought as education is no guarantee of a successful leader. Education should not be made the sole basis of entrusting a person with the power to administer the nation or state. For instance, Ranjit Singh was not literate. Shivaji was not literate. Akbar was not much of a literate. But all of them were great leader and administrators[8]. It also puts already weaker section resulting from failure of state machinery in providing education in an even disadvantageous position.
Democracy is not about elevating to power the most competent candidate but to choose a representative of choice. It is for the people by the people and of the people.
[1] The Constitution of India, art. 84
[2] Election disqualifications and the constituent assembly debate, available at: file:///C:/Users/HP/Downloads/Election%20Disqualifications%20and%20the%20Constituent%20Assembly%20Debates%20_%20Indian%20Constitutional%20Law%20and%20Philosophy.pdf (last visited on June 29, 2019).
[3] Census of India, available at: http://censusindia.gov.in/2011census/censusinfodashboard/index.html (last visited on June 29, 2019).
[4] Supra note 2 at 2.
[5] The Constitution of India, art. 14
[6] (2016)1 SCC 463.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Educational Qualification for Contesting Elections, available at: http://visionias.in/beta/sites/all/themes/momentum/files/interview_issues_2016/Educational_Qualification_for_Contesting_Elections.pdf (last visited on June 29, 2019).
This article is authored by Subiyah Hafeez Siddiqui, student of B.A. LL.B (Hons.), Rajiv Gandhi National University Of Law, Punjab
Also Read – One Nation One Election: Constitution Vs Politics
