Why in the News?

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has initiated steps to de-list 345 Registered Unrecognised Political Parties (RUPPs).

What’s in Today’s Article?

• About RUPPs (Overview, Reasons Behind Their Delisting, Legal Framework, Financial Implications, Reforms, etc.)

Overview of Registered Unrecognised Political Parties (RUPPs)

• RUPPs are associations registered with the Election Commission of India (ECI) under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
• These parties are distinct from recognised national or state parties as they have not secured a sufficient vote share or seats in previous elections.
• Despite not having official recognition, RUPPs enjoy certain benefits:

• Tax exemption under Section 13A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
• Eligibility for common poll symbols during elections.
• Permission to nominate up to 20 ‘star campaigners’ for canvassing.

• They are, however, required to:

• Contest elections periodically.
• File annual audit accounts and contribution reports.
• Disclose donations exceeding Rs. 20,000, and ensure that no donations above Rs. 2,000 are accepted in cash.

Reasons Behind the Election Commission Delisting 345 RUPPs

• The Election Commission has initiated the process of delisting 345 RUPPs that have:

• Not contested even a single election in the last six years.
• Failed to maintain physical offices at their registered addresses.
• Ignored statutory filing requirements, including financial disclosures.

• This is part of a broader clean-up initiated by the ECI, which began identifying and acting against “non-functional” parties as early as 2022.
• Since then, 284 RUPPs have been delisted and 253 declared inactive for failing to comply.
• The latest batch of 345 brings this drive to a sharper focus, particularly with upcoming elections in view.
• The Election Commission has tasked the Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs) of the respective States and UTs to issue show-cause notices to these parties before delisting.
• Final decisions will be made based on the CEO’s recommendations.

Legal Framework and Loopholes

• The right to form a political association is protected under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution.
• Registration is governed by Section 29A of the RP Act, 1951, which does not grant ECI explicit power to de-register a political party once registered, except in cases of fraud or violation of constitutional allegiance.

• This legal vacuum means that while the ECI can delist or declare parties inactive (affecting their privileges), it cannot de-register them outright.
• The Supreme Court, in Indian National Congress vs Institute of Social Welfare (2002), affirmed this interpretation.
• Thus, ECI’s current action is limited to delisting RUPPs from the list of parties eligible for benefits, not erasing them as legal entities.

Financial Implications and Risks

• Many of these parties were found to be:

• Availing 100% tax exemptions despite non-compliance.
• Operating as shell entities or even engaging in money laundering activities.
• Selling nominations by fielding dummy candidates to extract withdrawal payments from major parties.

• By delisting such entities, the ECI aims to block misuse of public trust and state-sanctioned benefits.

Reforms Needed and Way Forward

• The Law Commission, in its 255th report (2015), recommended empowering the ECI to de-register parties that fail to contest elections for 10 consecutive years.
• The ECI echoed this in its 2016 electoral reform memorandum.
• Additionally, the lack of inner-party democracy remains an unresolved concern. Many RUPPs, and even some recognised parties, operate without periodic internal elections or transparency in leadership appointments.
• The 170th and 255th Law Commission Reports called for specific amendments to the RP Act to instil internal democracy.
• Policy Recommendations:

• Amend the RP Act to explicitly allow de-registration for non-contesting or non-compliant parties.
• Mandate inner-party democracy through legal provisions.
• Establish independent auditing of party finances, possibly under a public accounting body.