SC has heard cases re the anti-defection law, confidence motions, and govt formation for the last 35 years. One can say that the parties have kept finding new ways to subvert the court's judgments, but part of it is because the SC hasn't addressed the issue sufficiently.
The very fact that these cases have surfaced repeatedly is proof that there is something missing in the way the court is sorting the cases. A former CJI said recently, the spirit of the Constitution is being lost, when only the specific questions in each case are considered.
What motivates these? Is there a stated truth and a different apparent truth? Is there consistency in the stance of parties across time, geography? Is there a sanctity to elections and voting that must also be protected, in addition to claims by parties? These are the real Qs.
One day, if our democracy has to be set on firmer ground, the justices will have to address this with the necessary finality. For now, we still await that kind of discerning justice.
In all these cases, a mechanism to automatically include the voters as interested parties must be evolved. To leave the people out as though they are mere spectators is one reason why the questions have never been framed right. The public interest should include the public.
