The Express of September 7, 2006 carried two pieces on the op-ed page on Jharkhand and Uttar Pradesh. Varghese K. George’s ‘Enos Ekka and the swing vote’ discussed the political drama in Ranchi that has got a new twist with the resignation of Chief Minister Arjun Munda even before the floor test could take place, and Darshan Desai’s ‘ABCD in UP: Apna alphabet soap’ explored the implications of a political party in UP, Apna Dal, offering nominations to the likes of Babloo Srivastava, Abu Salem and Dawood Ibrahim. While the pieces were about two different states, they converged on the same facet of the political process: the state of political parties.

In a representative democracy, political parties form a critical link between government and the governed. Parties mobilise and aggregate public opinion and concerns. They provide a coherent and accessible channel for voters to express preferences. The functioning of a democratic governance system in a large and diverse country like India would be impossible without the existence of intermediaries such as political parties.

There are, however, two major problems with the way our political system functions. One, parties function completely unfettered, a law into themselves. Their formation and functioning is left entirely to the parties themselves. There is a provision for registration of political parties under Section 29A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 under which “any association or body of individual citizens of India calling itself a political party (has to) make an application to the Election Commission for its registration as a political party”. While the EC can ask for information, by and large it registers parties as they apply for registration. Subsequently, there is no guideline or requirement for their functioning.

... contd.