Candidates with serious criminal records fare well in Gujarat polls
NEW DELHI: The winning candidates in the Gujarat assembly election were more than twice as likely to face at least one unresolved serious criminal case compared to candidates who lost the election, an analysis of poll returns and candidates’ public disclosures reveals.
Of the 182 winning candidates, 33 face at least one pending serious criminal charge. That’s about 18% of all incoming MLAs. Among the 1,634 candidates who lost, 113 of them, or about 7%, face such a charge.
Gujaratis are not alone in their preference for candidates with criminal histories. Recent studies of both state and national elections have shown that candidates facing criminal cases tend to outperform political competitors with clean records.
“Voters... often have a rational incentive to back politicians with criminal reputations,” writes Milan Vaishnav, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, in his book When Crime Pays: Money and Muscle in Indian Politics.
“In places where the rule of law is weak and social divisions are rife, politicians can use their criminality as a signal of their ability to do whatever it takes to protect the interests of their community.”
The classification for serious criminal cases was created by the Association for Democratic Ref- orms (ADR), an election watchdog.
Serious criminal charges tend to involve violence and carry longer maximum prison sentences, although ADR also classifies political crimes such as corruption, election tampering and crimes against women as serious.
The cases are pending and have not led to convictions, but they are unlikely to be frivolous or politically motivated.
Under the law, candidates are only required to disclose criminal cases of which a judge has taken cognizance, which means police have already filed a charge sheet and a prosecutor has already filed charges in a court.
Twelve losing candidates were not included in the analysis because the HT could not access their criminal records.
In south Gujarat’s Dediapada, winning candidate Maheshbhai Chhotubhai Vasava, of the Bhartiya Tribal Party, faces a total of 24 criminal cases, the most of all candidates, according to the affidavit he filed with the Election Commission (EC) of India when he ran for election.
Many of those cases are classified as serious, including two related to murder, two related to kidnapping, and five related to dacoity.
Vasava, 50, is the son of longtime Gujarati legislator Amarsinh Chhotubhai Vasava, 70. Neither responded to requests for comment on younger Vasava’s criminal history.
Vasava has not been convicted of any of these 24 cases, some of which stem from incidents which occurred as far back as 1989.
But he was convicted in May, 2016, on charges related to rioting and unlawful assembly, a verdict which he has appealed against.
Neither of the two major national parties shied away from nominating candidates facing serious criminal charges.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which won the state, nominated 182 candidates, of which 25, or about 14%, face serious criminal charges.
The runner-up, the Congress, put forth 175 candidates, of which 38, or about 22%, faced charges of a serious nature.
In north Gujarat’s Patan, for instance, winning Congressman Kritkumar Chamanlal Patel faces 12 pending criminal charges, including one related to attempted murder.
And in Dabhoi, winning BJP candidate Shailesh Kanaiyalal Mehta, also known as Shailesh Sotta, faces 11 cases, including two related to attempted murder. In his affidavit, Mehta describes himself as a partner in a real estate firm.
Both Patel, 48, and Sotta, 57, will be first-time MLAs in the Gujarat.
Neither responded to requests for comment on their criminal histories.