Lo and behold! Aam Aadmi Party and its Il Duce- Arvind Kejriwal are back in the media limelight- Not for abusing Modi, Not for campaigning for Punjab in Canada and No, not for getting inked or shoed again. This time, it is thanks to the President, Pranab Mukherjee who has rejected the amendment made by AAP to the Delhi Members of Legislative Assembly (Removal of Disqualification) Act, 1997. Basically what happened is this. AAP stormed to power in Delhi with a massive majority in February 2015. Now, according to the Constitution of India, the total number of ministers in the Council of Ministers must not exceed 15% of the total number of members of the House of the People. That meant that Kejriwal could not have 20 or 30 ministers in the 70 member Delhi assembly. For AAP that had 67 elected MLAs, this was a big problem. Unless the loyalty of these MLAs could be ensured, Kejriwal’s government could be at the mercy of the nefarious designs of his political opponents. This was also a time when rebellion sponsored by YoYa and the Bhushans was raging. Hence, Kejriwal, in a political masterstroke, appointed 21 AAP MLAs as Parliamentary Secretaries on 13th March 2015. Thereafter, Delhi government introduced a law that retrospectively exempted the office of Parliamentary Secretary from the office of profit classification. It is this amendment that has now been rejected by the President.

21 AAP MLAs held Office of Profit:

Office of Profit is a term used in article 102(1)(A) of the Indian constitution, which bars a member from holding an office that could result in financial gains or benefits. Subsequent amendments in law resulted in some offices being exempted from the ‘Office of Profit’ term, while others continued to be in the proscribed list. Representatives are also forbidden from holding an Office of Profit under the Representation of People Act and article 191(E) of the Constitution as well. Now, while AAP claims that the term Parliamentary Secretary is merely a terminology and that the MLAs appointed as Parliamentary Secretaries are not drawing any remunerations, the fact is that the designation Parliamentary Secretary comes attached with a number of perks and benefits, for example office, office staff, vehicles for commuting etc., which means that the matter is murkier than it seems. No doubt then, that the Election Commission, acting as a Quasi-Judicial body has sought the MLA’s response before taking any action on the matter.

21 AAP MLAs: EC has the final say

In case the 21 AAP MLAs are unable to satisfy the election commission, it could very well result in their dismissal, which would undoubtedly result in legal wranglings. For now, however, President’s refusal to grant assent to the bill should be seen as nothing less than a slap on Kejriwal’s face. No wonder that he has begun issuing his oft repeated calumniation against PM Narendra Modi. Kejriwal, more than anyone else, realizes that this is a big blow to his ‘honest politics’ brand. Constitutional experts say that a legislator who holds an office or post under the government – even if no remuneration is received but enjoys perks would be deemed to be holding an office of profit.

21 AAP MLAs: What’s the way out for Kejriwal?

As a next step, the Election Commission is expected to give a hearing to the 21 AAP MLAs, based on which it will finally arrive at a decision. In case it decides that the MLAs are indeed holding office of profit, it would result in the membership of these MLAs getting cancelled, thereby necessitating polls for these 21 seats in Delhi. In the meanwhile, Arvind Kejriwal could get the rejected bill passed once again in the assembly.

The better, but the infinitely more difficult thing for Kejriwal to do would be to accept that the whole MLAs as Parliamentary Secretary thing looks murky and announce that he is prepared to go by the recommendations of the Election Commission. That could be one way of reiterating AAP’s commitment to honest politics. It could strengthen Kejriwal’s anti-corruption crusader image as well. Irrespective of the outcome of the polls for these 21 seats, AAP would continue to command a towering majority in the Delhi Assembly. Unfortunately though, Kejriwal has chosen to stick to his Modi-bashing strategy which firstly endears him further to his “AAPtard” followers and secondly enables the core issue to get lost in the din of allegations and counter allegations.

21 AAP MLAs, oh and a Transport Minister

On a side note, Delhi transport minister, Gopal Rai has also tendered his resignation. While he cites health as the reason behind his decision, there have been corruption allegations levelled against him for unduly favoring a bus aggregator company. BJP MLA, Vijender Gupta had filed a complaint to the ACB against Gopal Rai. Additionally, the CAG has also lashed out at the Delhi government for spending of Rs 18.47 crore on nationwide ad campaign on its first anniversary, calling it “unjustified”, “irregular” and against the “basic financial tenets of public expenditure”. The Office for Profit issue, combined with corruption allegations against a senior AAP minister and censuring by the CAG point to the direction which AAP has taken since coming to power. The way things seem right now, AAP doesn’t seem very different from a Samajwadi Party of a Rashtriya Janata Dal and Arvind Kejriwal seems every bit as parochial as Akhilesh Yadav and Tejashwi Yadav.

http://www.india.com/news/cities/cag-lashes-out-at-aam-aadmi-party-government-for-spending-public-money-unnecessarily-on-ads-1244053/

http://www.oneindia.com/india/aap-s-dual-office-bill-withheld-president-india-2126527.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Council_of_Ministers

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Setback-for-Kejriwal-President-declines-assent-to-Delhi-govts-bill-on-appointment-of-parliamentary-secretaries/articleshow/52733330.cms