The news broke like a political earthquake last week. Raghav Chadha, one of the most recognizable faces of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), along with six other Rajya Sabha MPs — Swati Maliwal, Sandeep Pathak, Harbhajan Singh, Ashok Mittal, Rajinder Gupta, and Vikramjit Singh Sahney, announced their decision to merge with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Citing disillusionment with AAP’s direction and claiming they represented two-thirds of the party’s strength in the Upper House, the move was quickly accepted by the Rajya Sabha Chairman. In one stroke, AAP’s Rajya Sabha tally dropped sharply, while the BJP’s numbers got a boost.
This high-profile shift has once again put the spotlight on political defection in India, a practice that many argue is quietly eroding the foundations of our democracy. When elected representatives switch sides without facing the voters again, it raises serious questions: Whose mandate are they really honouring, the people’s or their own ambition?
Current anti-defection law in India
India’s anti-defection law is enshrined in the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, introduced through the 52nd Amendment in 1985. Its main goal was to curb the “Aaya Ram Gaya Ram” culture of frequent party-hopping that destabilized governments in the 1960s and 70s.
Here’s what the law currently says in simple terms:
- An MP or MLA can be disqualified if they voluntarily give up membership of their original party.
- They can also be disqualified for voting or abstaining from voting against the party whip in the House.
- Exception for merger: If at least two-thirds of the members of a legislative party agree to merge with another party, they are protected from disqualification. This is the route Raghav Chadha and the AAP MPs invoked.
The Speaker or Chairman in Rajya Sabha decides on disqualification petitions, but this process has often been criticized for delays and political bias. Over the years, the law has been tweaked — for instance, in 2003 it was strengthened to ban defectors from becoming ministers for a certain period — but loopholes remain, especially the two-thirds merger clause, which allows large-scale defections to appear “legal.”
Critics argue that while the law was meant to protect stability, it has instead been weaponized or bypassed, turning defection into a strategic tool rather than a rare exception.
Defection to the BJP in the last 10 years
Defection isn’t new, but the numbers tell a striking story. According to analyses by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and other reports covering 2016–2020 (with trends continuing strongly afterward), nearly 45% of MLAs who switched parties and re-contested elections joined the BJP. In contrast, the Congress lost the highest number of legislators.
From 2014 onward, especially under the current dispensation, the BJP has emerged as the biggest beneficiary of such shifts. One in every four BJP candidates in recent Lok Sabha polls has been a defector from other parties. Over the past decade, dozens of high-profile leaders, from state Chief Ministers to Union Ministers, have crossed over, often bringing with them groups of legislators.
This steady influx has helped the BJP expand its footprint, particularly in regions where it previously had limited presence. But it has also left opposition parties weakened, sometimes triggering government collapses without fresh mandates from the people.
Defection cases that rocked parties
Some defections have been nothing short of dramatic, leaving the parties they left in shock and disbelief:
- Himanta Biswa Sarma (2015): A powerful Congress leader in Assam, he shifted along with a faction to the BJP. His move significantly altered the Northeast’s political map and helped the BJP gain ground. He later became Chief Minister and remains one of the party’s most influential voices in the region. Many in Congress saw this as a deep betrayal from a once-loyal insider.
- Jyotiraditya Scindia (2020): He resigned from Congress with 22 MLAs, leading to the dramatic collapse of the Kamal Nath government in Madhya Pradesh. The BJP returned to power, and Scindia was later inducted into the Union Cabinet. For Congress, losing a young dynast with strong family legacy was a massive jolt.
- Pema Khandu (2016): As Chief Minister of Arunachal Pradesh, he led a mass defection of over 40 Congress MLAs, first to the PPA and then aligning with the BJP. The government changed hands without elections — a classic case of how defection can override voter will.
- N. Biren Singh (2016): He quit Congress amid internal issues and joined the BJP just before elections, eventually becoming Manipur’s first BJP Chief Minister.
Other notable group or individual shifts include Digambar Kamat in Goa (2022), and a wave between 2022–2024: Ashok Chavan, Milind Deora, Anil K. Antony, Gourav Vallabh, Naveen Jindal, Hardik Patel, Sunil Jakhar, and R.P.N. Singh, among others.
Many of these leaders had been vocal critics of the BJP in the past. Some had publicly accused it of divisive politics or questioned its policies. Yet, once they joined, they were welcomed and often given prominent roles.
Rewards for the switch
A clear pattern has emerged: defection is frequently followed by promotion.
- Himanta Biswa Sarma and N. Biren Singh became Chief Ministers.
- Jyotiraditya Scindia secured a Union Cabinet berth.
- Others like Jitin Prasada, R.P.N. Singh, and Sunil Jakhar received ministerial or organizational positions.
- Even in the recent Raghav Chadha case, the move is being seen as a strategic alignment that could open new avenues for the leaders involved.
For many, switching sides has meant political survival and growth in a landscape where the ruling party at the Centre holds significant influence.
The controversial role of central investigative agencies
One of the most debated aspects of modern defection is the alleged role of agencies like the CBI and ED. Reports have highlighted that since 2014, at least 25 prominent opposition leaders facing corruption probes crossed over to the BJP — and in 23 of those cases, the investigations either stalled, slowed dramatically, or saw closure reports filed.
Examples include leaders like Ashok Chavan (Adarsh Housing case), Himanta Biswa Sarma (earlier Saradha chit fund links), and several others where cases appeared to lose momentum post-defection. Critics call this the “washing machine” effect — where joining the BJP allegedly cleans up legal troubles.
While the government and BJP strongly deny any misuse, calling such claims politically motivated, the pattern has fueled distrust in institutions. Many argue that selective enforcement undermines the rule of law and makes defection even more attractive for those under scrutiny.
On the flip side, some defectors have faded into relative obscurity after joining, while others continue to wield influence, showing that outcomes vary based on utility and timing.
How defection undermines Democracy
These frequent political defection strikes at the core of representative democracy. Voters elect representatives based on party symbols, manifestos, and ideologies. When those representatives switch sides en masse — often citing “larger national interest” or internal party issues — it dilutes the mandate given by the people.
It encourages horse-trading, instability, and a culture where loyalty is to power rather than principles. The two-thirds merger loophole, while legal, allows clever bypassing of the anti-defection spirit. Combined with delays in disqualification decisions, it weakens accountability.
Prateeksha Kumari is a journalist and strategic communications professional specialising in digital journalism, political reporting, and public affairs. Her work focuses on grassroots issues, governance, and civic developments, with an emphasis on clarity, accuracy, and narrative-driven reporting.
She holds a Master’s degree in Journalism and Mass Communication from Himachal Pradesh University, Shimla and has qualified the UGC-NET examination, reflecting her academic grounding in media studies and communication research. Her reporting spans politics, public policy, health, education, and socio-economic issues, and she is experienced in bilingual (Hindi and English) content creation tailored to diverse audiences.
Alongside her journalistic work, she brings experience in political communication and public relations, where she has contributed to campaign messaging, media outreach, and narrative building. She has worked on integrated communication strategies across print and digital platforms, combining editorial judgment with audience insight and data-led content approaches.
