For example

Sonia Gandhi?s resignation from Parliament is an example of how political events sometimes get caught up in the law of unintended consequences.

Sonia Gandhi’s resignation from Parliament is an example of how political events sometimes get caught up in the law of unintended consequences. When a 1959 statute that disqualified persons from holding an ‘office of profit’ was invoked by an individual in Kanpur to unseat Jaya Bachchan a week ago, most political parties did not realise the larger implications of the action. But when it began to appear that the Opposition intended to cite the same law to unseat a number of other functionaries, the penny dropped. For, among those that could be affected were the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Somnath Chatterjee, and the president of the Congress Party, Mrs Gandhi.

HT Image

Almost all legal experts are agreed that, at least in the case of Mrs Gandhi, the chairpersonship of the National Advisory Council does not constitute an ‘office of profit’. But as Mrs Gandhi noted with a sense of hurt, she was being dragged into a needless controversy. By resigning her Lok Sabha seat and the chairpersonship of the council, Mrs Gandhi has signalled what is important for her — her reputation for selfless public service. In the process she has reinforced the credentials that she had burnished when she had turned down the prime ministership two years ago. Mrs Gandhi’s action should perhaps serve as an example for the political class to take a fresh and detached look at the law for the office of profit, without resorting to innuendo and denigration of any person. Contrary to its wording, it does not mean what it says. Because many of the offices in question relate to public service and are positions that provide an incumbent token compensation for transport or for attending meetings. But it’s true that after the enactment of a law to restrict the size of cabinets, many state governments took recourse to creating positions that would indeed fall under the definition of ‘office of profit’.

The government would be well advised to call an all-party meeting to resolve the issue that affects all state legislatures as well as Parliament. Thereafter, fresh legislation could be worked out to bring the statute in line with the realities of our times.