REGISTERED UNRECOGNISED POLITICAL PARTIES REGULATION EXPLAINED

Why In News?

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has intensified its nationwide drive to verify and delist hundreds of inactive Registered Unrecognised Political Parties that fail to contest elections, submit contribution reports, or maintain basic statutory transparency.

What are Registered Unrecognised Political Parties?

They are political entities that are formally registered with the ECI but have either not secured sufficient electoral thresholds to gain recognition as State or National parties, or are newly formed parties that have never contested elections.

• Out of nearly 2,800 registered political parties in India, over 97% fall under the category of RUPPs, making them the overwhelming majority of political formations in the country.

Distinction Between Registration and Recognition: Registration is a preliminary administrative entry into the ECI rolls, whereas "Recognition" (as a National or State party) is an earned status contingent upon securing specified percentages of polled votes or legislative seats under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.

 

What is the Difference Between Registered and Recognised Political Parties?

Criteria for Recognition: Recognised National and State parties must fulfill rigorous electoral performance benchmarks (such as winning 6% of valid votes plus 2 Assembly seats, or 3% of total Assembly seats, or 1 Lok Sabha seat for every 25 seats allotted to a State).

Reservation of Election Symbols: Recognised parties enjoy exclusive, permanent "reserved symbols" across their respective States or nationwide, whereas RUPPs must choose from a common pool of "free symbols" allotted on a first-come, first-served basis per election.

Star Campaigner Allowances: Recognised national and state parties are legally permitted to deploy up to 40 star campaigners whose travel expenses are excluded from candidates' individual election expenditure limits, whereas RUPPs are restricted to a maximum of 20 star campaigners.

Access to Free Public Broadcast Airtime: Recognised parties receive dedicated, free telecast and broadcast time on state-owned Doordarshan and All India Radio networks during election cycles, a privilege completely unavailable to RUPPs.

Supply of Free Electoral Rolls: Recognised parties receive two sets of free electoral rolls and polling station lists from the returning officers, facilitating their ground campaign logistics.

Why Have RUPPs Become a Regulatory Concern?

Massive Proliferation of Inactive Entities: India's registry lists over 2,800 RUPPs, yet ECI empirical analyses indicate that fewer than 30% of these parties actually field candidates in assembly or parliamentary elections.

Complete Failure to Contest Elections: Hundreds of registered parties have not fielded a single candidate for over a decade, functioning merely on paper while maintaining active registration certificates.

Persistent Non-Submission of Annual Audit Reports: A vast majority of RUPPs systematically violate ECI guidelines by failing to submit chartered accountant-audited annual accounts within the stipulated deadlines.

Defiance of Contribution Report Mandates: Parties routinely fail to furnish their annual Contribution Reports under Section 29C, concealing the sources of political funds and the identities of high-value donors.

Vehicles for Tax Evasion and Money Laundering: Investigations by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) have uncovered that several shell RUPPs were created primarily to route untaxed black money, issue bogus donation receipts, and siphon funds under Section 13A tax shields.

Debate Over Delisting and Deregistration of RUPPs

Absence of Explicit Deregistration Authority in RPA: While Section 29A grants the ECI the power to register political parties, the Representation of the People Act does not contain any corresponding express statutory provision empowering the Commission to cancel or deregister a party.

The Supreme Court Ruling: In Indian National Congress (I) vs. Institute of Social Welfare & Ors. (2002), the Supreme Court ruled that the ECI is a quasi-judicial body and cannot deregister a political party except under three strict exceptions:

• Where registration was obtained through fraud or misrepresentation.

• Where a party is declared unlawful by the Central Government under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

• Where a party amends its constitution to state it no longer abides by the Constitution of India.

Administrative "Delisting" vs Statutory "Deregistration": Unable to deregister parties due to judicial restrictions, the ECI developed the mechanism of "delisting" (declaring them inactive on the electoral rolls), a practice that sits in an ambiguous legal space.

Judicial Review and Stay Orders: Several high courts, including the Kerala High Court, have issued stay orders against ECI delisting notices on the grounds that delisting without explicit legislative authority violates administrative due process.

Long-Standing Legislative Recommendations: Since 1998, the ECI and multiple Law Commission reports have repeatedly urged the Union Government to amend Section 29A to explicitly confer statutory deregistration powers on the poll body.

What are the Major Regulatory Challenges?

Absence of a Statutory Definition for "Inactive" Parties: Current electoral law lacks objective, legally codified criteria defining what constitutes an "inactive" or "non-serious" party.

Procedural and Legal Lacunae in Deregistration: The absence of a parliamentary amendment leaves every ECI delisting order vulnerable to prolonged litigation and judicial stays.

Severe Institutional Capacity Constraints: The ECI and state CEOs lack specialized forensic auditing wings and intelligence officers to cross-verify the financial books of thousands of parties.

Ensuring Adherence to Natural Justice: Tracking down defunct parties to serve notices, conducting personal hearings, and recording quasi-judicial orders across thousands of entities demands massive administrative time.

Inter-Agency Coordination Gaps: Disconnect between the ECI, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU-IND), and state police forces slows the prosecution of corrupt party promoters.

Way Forward

Amending the Representation of the People Act, 1951: Parliament must enact an amendment incorporating Section 29B and 29C modifications that explicitly vest the ECI with the power to deregister parties guilty of prolonged inactivity, fraud, or tax evasion.

• Example: Law Commission of India’s 255th Report on Electoral Reforms, recommending statutory powers for the ECI to deregister political parties that do not contest elections for ten consecutive years.

Linking Tax Exemptions to Concrete Electoral Performance: The Ministry of Finance should amend Section 13A of the Income Tax Act to mandate that parties must secure a minimum vote threshold (such as 1%) to claim blanket tax exemptions on political donations.

Deploying Unified Digital Compliance Dashboards: Require all registered parties to file annual returns, balance sheets, and donor lists through a public-facing portal, enabling automated data matching with CBDT records.

Adhering Strictly to the Principles of Natural Justice: Formulate a transparent, tiered delisting protocol that ensures physical inspection, multi-channel notices, and formal hearings before taking punitive action.

Protecting Legitimate Grassroots Political Movements: Safeguard genuine political incubation by exempting nascent parties from harsh deregistration norms during their initial four-year startup phase.

• Example: Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) on Ethics in Governance, highlighting the need to nurture political competition while curbing criminalization and black money.

Conclusion

Registered Unrecognised Political Parties enable grassroots democracy, but unmonitored misuse for tax evasion and money laundering threatens electoral integrity. Empowering the Election Commission with deregistration authority and enforcing strict financial compliance can eliminate inactive shell parties while protecting democratic pluralism.

Source: THEHINDU