Wednesday, April 24, 2024
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
Home Court News Updates Courts Kerala MLA’s Disqualification: Code of Misconduct

Kerala MLA’s Disqualification: Code of Misconduct

0
Kerala MLA’s Disqualification: Code of Misconduct

Above: The Kerala High Court has allowed KM Shazi (left) to appeal against its verdict in the Supreme Court; Petitioner M Nikesh Kumar

The Kerala High Court disqualifies Azhikode MLA KM Shaji and bars him from contesting polls for six years

By NV Ravindranathan Nair in Thiruvananathapuram

A member of the Kerala assembly belonging to the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), KM Shaji wears his secularism on his sleeve. But the reputation of the 47-year-old took a big hit recently when the Kerala High Court declared null and void his election from the Azhikode assembly constituency in Kannur district and also disqualified him from contesting polls for six years.

The charge against him was that he had violated the code of conduct in the last assembly elections in 2016 by distributing pamphlets that were deemed inflammatory and communal.

However, within three hours after delivering the verdict, Justice PD Rajan stayed his own order for two weeks to facilitate Shaji to appeal against it in the Supreme Court.

The Court passed the order on an election petition filed by Shaji’s principal opponent, the CPI(M) candidate and journalist M Nikesh Kumar, who lost to Shaji by a margin of 2,287 votes in the poll. However, it declined Kumar’s plea for declaring him the winner to take Shaji’s seat in the assembly. But it directed Shaji to pay Rs 50,000 to Kumar towards legal expenses and Rs 5,000 as court expenses.

The verdict has come a rude shock to Shaji who is widely seen as the liberal and secular face of the Muslim League. “I won the elections from a constituency where the Muslim population is only 20 per cent. How can I win if I spread communal spite during the election campaign? It is a manipulated case and the petitioner himself is notorious for manipulating things,” said Shaji responding to the verdict.

He also described the verdict as something that has tarnished his image. “I am not bothered much about my MLA seat. But to say that I had spouted communal venom is a disgrace to my reputation. It pains me and I have to prove it wrong,” he reiterated.

On the other side, Kumar was both elated as well as dejected as he had hoped that the Court while unseating Shaji would declare him the winner. “I will continue the legal battle to get my­self declared as the winner,” he said.

Kumar contested and lost from the very seat his father and Communist re­bel leader MV Raghavan had won after the CPI(M) party expelled him in 1986. As for Shaji, it is for the second time he had won from the Azhikode constituency, considered a CPI(M) bastion.

Among the evidence that the Court used for arriving at its conclusion were a few pamphlets which Shaji claims were not distributed by him but were manipulated to make him look like a villain.

In his petition, Kumar had alleged that Shaji managed to win by resorting to corrupt practices. He said that Shaji, a Muslim, made communal appeals to voters of his community to cast their votes keeping in mind that he was a practicing Muslim. Kumar also claimed that pamphlets were circulated in the constituency urging people not to vote for a candidate who is not a believer of the Islamic faith. He further alleged that Shaji had stated that non Muslims will never find the path to heaven.

“Non-Muslims have no place in the kind Allah’s abode. On the dooms day, they will never cross the Siraat bridge to heaven. They are to sleep with the devil. All Muslims, please pray to Allah for the victory of he who prays five times a day for our safety—K Mohammad Shaji or KM Shaji. Please vote for K Mohammad Shaji and lead him to victory,” the pamphlet produced before the Court said.

The United Democratic Front (UDF) convener Benny Behennan said Shaji was the face of secularism and always stood out against religious fundamentalism said, “The UDF or IUML has not and will not publish such a pamphlet. We intend to appeal in the apex court,” he said.

Shaji pointed out that a corrupt official of the Election commission had manipulated the pamphlets he had seized from the Muslim League workers and inserted fake ones in it. And when the pamphlets were sought through an RTI request, fake ones were produced to render his election invalid. “It was the handiwork of a man with a diabolical mind. He is such a manipulator,” he said referring to his opponent.

Kerala has a history of MLAs being unseated by courts only to be later reinstated by a higher judicial authority or voters themselves. In 1957, the election of Rosamma Punnoose of the CPI from Devikulam was nullified by the court. She is reportedly the first legislator in the country to face the wrath of the court. But in the ensuing bypoll, she was re-elected and became another first of sorts—the first person to be re-elected in a bypoll.

In 1977, probably for the first time in the state, two leaders were disqualified for resorting to communal campaign during elections. The elections of political heavyweights, CH Muhammed Koya of the IUML and KM Mani of the Kerala Congress, were set aside by the court. However, the Supreme Court exo­nerated them of the charges and reinstated them in the assembly.

The case of PC Thomas, the lone NDA candidate to win from Kerala to the Lok Sabha in 2004 was somewhat different. His opponent CPI(M) candidate PM Ismail moved the court challenging Thomas’s election when he was declared winner with a thin majority of around 500 votes. The High Court, and later the Supreme Court, nullified his election citing that Thomas had exploited the voters’ religious sentiments. Following Election Commission’s recommendation, he was disqualified from contesting for three years.

The disqualification of PC George, a member of the Kerala Congress (M), by the assembly speaker was a hotly debated political issue. On November 13, 2015, then Speaker N Sakthan disqualified George with retrospective effect from June 3, 2015, for indulging in anti-party activities in the legislature. George challenged the order in the High Court on March 14, 2016, and the Court quashed the Speaker’s order observing that it was a malafide action.

Shaji’s last hope lies in the apex court overturning the High Court order.