5th phase data

Embargo: 12 Noon of 24 April, 2007
UP Assembly Elections 2007
UP Election Watch
ADR PVCHR

Statement of Sant Vivek Das of Kabir Chaura Math, Bibhu Mohapatra of ADR,Dr. Lenin of PVCHR, and Shruti of UP Election watch

The fifth phase of UP Assembly elections covers 58 constituencies. There are in all 863 candidates in the fray. With this phase the total number of candidates considered by UP Election watch reaches 4231. There are 258 (29.89%) candidates put up by major political parties, 228 (26.41%) by smaller political parties, and 377 (43.68%) candidates are independents. There are 57 (6.60%) female candidates in the fray this time.

Summary of Findings:

There are 115 candidates who have pending criminal cases against them. With this, the total number of candidates in all 5 phases who have pending criminal cases reaches 582.
For the fifth phase, BSP leads the list of such candidates with 26/58 (44.82%), closely followed by SP 21/56 (37.50%). The BJP and the INC lag behind with 12/48 (25%) and 7/58 (12.06%) respectively. In the third and fourth phases, it was SP, which led the list in this category.
But if we look at the combined figures for all the 5 phases, SP still tops the list of candidates with pending cases with 34.62%, followed by BSP, 32.53%, BJP, 27.86%, and the INC, 20.42%.
Out of the 115 candidates who have pending criminal cases, 58 (50.43%) are either Graduates or post Graduates with professional degrees.
If we look at the age groups of candidates with pending criminal cases, 66 (57.39%) fall in the category of 41-60 yrs, 43 (37.39%) in the 25-40 yrs, and only 6 (5.22%) fall in the category of 61 and above age group.
Out of the 115, there are 23 candidates who have declared assets worth more than a Crore. Among the major parties, SP, BSP and BJP have 9, 8, 3 candidates in this category respectively.
In the list arranged according to number of cases, the Apna Dal candidate from Kunda (98) leads the list with 45 cases pending against him.
There are 7 Constituencies, which have 4 or more candidates with pending cases.
There are 16 candidates among the 115, who have pending cases against them according to the affidavit submitted by UP Govt to the High Court.6 of them belong to the BSP, 5 to the SP, and 3 to the BJP. Among these 2 BJP, 1BSP, and 1 SP candidate have not declared any cases pending against them in their current affidavit filed along with the nomination papers.
There are 61 candidates who have declared their assets worth more than Rs.1 Crore. The richest candidate for this phase is from Lucknow East, from the INC. This candidate does not have PAN. Interestingly INC has been putting up the richest candidates in the last two phases also.
Among the 61 crorepatis, 18 belong to the SP, 14 to INC, 13 to BSP and 8 to the BJP.
In the top 10 candidates with high assets, the INC has 5, BSP,2, SP,2 and BJP,1.
In the list for High assets and NO PAN, there are 13 candidates, of which, 5 belong to BSP, 4 to INC, and 3 to SP and1 to NLHP.
Average assets of a main party candidate has significantly gone up in this phase with the average INC candidate having 1.77 Crores, BSP-1.13 Crores, SP—1.01 Crores, and BJP 0.56 Crores.
The average main party candidates’ liability too has gone up significantly. INC tops the list with 12.15 lakhs, followed by BSP, 7.90 lakhs, SP, 7.88 lakhs and BJP 2.76 lakhs.
In the list of candidates with high liability and NO PAN, there are 14 candidates. The loan amounts range from Rs 5 lakh to 1.5 Crores. BSP and SP have 4 candidates each in this category, while the INC has 3.
In the top ten list of candidates with high liabilities, the INC has 5 candidates, SP—3 and BSP—2.
Increasingly we see that there is a preference for educated candidates by all the main political parties. The combined average for all the 5 phases show that 65% candidates fielded by main parties are either Graduates and above or professionals.
In the category of age there is again a marked preference by main political parties for candidates in the age group of 41-60 (64.55%). BSP and SP head this category with 70.69 % and 69.64% candidates respectively. On the other hand, when we take into consideration the preference for younger candidates (25-40 yrs) we see that INC and BJP lead the list with 27.59% and 27.08% candidates respectively in this category.


The overall trend up till the fifth phase indicate that political parties are still relying on muscle power and money power to a great deal to win elections, though tickets to new candidates with pending criminal record shows a downward trend. One thing is clear that the new UP Assembly will most probably be a younger and educated one.

The UP Election Watch is a non-partisan civil society alliance for clean politics and accountable governance. Collection of affidavits, collation of information contained there in, and dissemination among voters of this information before the voting day are voluntary civil society efforts. This is intended to enable the voter to make an informed and responsible choice while casting their votes. It is to be remembered that in a democracy there is no position higher than that of the CITIZEN.
The UPEW, along with 200 CBOs/NGOs created a network of citizens across the state for this purpose.

The process has been initiated in the state by Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) which is engaged in strengthening democracy in the country through political and electoral reforms.

People's Vigilance committee on Human Rights (PVCHR) has become the coordinating body of the whole process. PVCHR has been involved with the cause of torture, hunger, malnutrition, education, health and governance for the most marginalized and voiceless section of Indian society.

The data has been culled from the affidavits submitted by candidates along with their nomination papers. We have tried our best to be accurate and non-partisan in presenting the data. In case of doubt, please consult the Election Commission’s website, www.eci.gov.in .




DR. Lenin Bibhu Mohapatra
www.pvchr.org www.adrindia.org
www.upelectionwatch.blogspot.com
24 April 2007

4th Phase

Summary Note

4th Phase

ADR PVCHR
The fourth phase of UP Assembly Elections is taking place in 57 constituencies. UP Election Watch has taken into consideration 922 candidates. There are 255 candidates put up by major political parties, 252 candidates by smaller parties and 415 candidates are independents. The average candidate per constituency works out to be 16.17. Till the fourth phase the UP election watch has analyzed 3368 candidates' background through their affidavits and has been able to disseminate the information among voters.
Summary of findings:
There are in all 63 women candidates (6.83%) in the fray in the fourth phase. INC and BJP lead among the parties with 14.2% and 13.4% women candidates respectively.
There are 116 candidates who have pending criminal cases against them.
Among the major political parties SP has 27 out of 57 (47.36%), BJP, 16 out of 52 (30.76%) INC, 15 out of 56 (26.78%) BSP, 12 out of 57 (21.05%), and RLD 6 out of 33 (18.18%) such candidates in the fray. There are 24 candidates with pending cases among the smaller political parties and the independents.
If we look at the combined figures for candidates with pending cases of the main political parties, SP leads the table with 33.91%, BSP—29.49%, BJP—28.50%, INC—22.51% and RLD—17.83%. Whereas the BSP led this category in the first and second phases, the SP has taken a sound lead over others in the third and fourth phases. This is significant because, it shows the level of dependence of political parties on such candidates and their belief that having pending criminal cases adds to the winnability factor of such candidates.
There are 24 candidates who, according to the affidavit submitted by the UP Government to the High Court, have pending criminal cases against them and were members of the outgoing assembly. In this list the INC, BSP and BJP have 1,1,and 3 candidates respectively, where as the rest, 19 candidates belong to the SP.
There are 9 constituencies, which have more than 4 candidates who have pending criminal cases against them.
There are 45 candidates who have declared assets worth more than Rs 1 Crore.
SP leads the list with 12, BSP, 9, BJP, 7, and INC, 6. Till the fourth phase more than 26% candidates belonging to SP and BSP have declared their assets as worth more than a Crore. Till the fourth phase there are 305 candidates who have declared assets worth more than one Crore.
Ajay Pratap Singh of INC (Colonelganj—147) is the richest candidate in this phase with 31.86 crores worth of declared assets. He also has the distinction of being the candidate with highest liability. The INC had also fielded the richest candidate in the third phase. Interestingly, among the top 10 richest candidates list, while the BJP, SP and INC have 1,1 and 2 candidates respectively, BSP has 4 candidates who have made it to this category.
The average candidate asset list is led by INC with 0.92 Crores, BSP,0.74 Crores, SP,0.63 Crores, BJP,0.45 Crores and RLD, 0.18 Crores.
The encouraging trend is that among all the main parties there is a consistent trend to field candidates who are in the age group of 41-60 yrs and are either graduates or above in terms of education. In both the segments it is above 60%.
735 candidates out of 922 (79.72%) candidates do NOT have PAN.
There are 14 candidates who have declared NIL assets. Among these there is one candidate belonging to a major political party (Kalpnath Sonkar, BJP, Nagar East, const no.151)
The UP Election Watch is a non-partisan civil society alliance for clean politics and accountable governance. Collection of affidavits, collation of information contained there in, and dissemination among voters of this information before the voting day are voluntary civil society efforts. This is intended to enable the voter to make an informed and responsible choice while casting their votes. It is to be remembered that in a democracy there is no position higher than that of the CITIZEN.
The UPEW, along with 200 CBOs/NGOs created a network of citizens across the state for this purpose.

The process has been initiated in the state by Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) which is engaged in strengthening democracy in the country through political and electoral reforms.

A high level committee of concerned eminent citizens of UP has been formed to lead this process. This committee is convened by Sri I.C. Dwivedi, Retd DGP.

People's Vigilance committee on Human Rights (PVCHR) has become the coordinating body of the whole process. PVCHR has been involved with the cause of torture, hunger, malnutrition, education, health and governance for the most marginalized and voiceless section of Indian society
The data has been culled from the affidavits submitted by candidates along with their nomination papers. We have tried our best to be accurate and non-partisan in presenting the data. In case of doubt, please consult the Election Commission's website, www.eci.gov.in .
DR. Lenin Bibhu Mohapatra
www.pvchr.org www.adrindia.org
www.upelectionwatch.blogspot.com
19 April 2007

3rd phase data:UP Election Watch

Summary Note

The third phase of UP Assembly Elections is taking place in 57 constituencies. UP Election Watch has taken into consideration 859 candidates. There are 273 candidates put up by major political parties, 231 by smaller parties and 355 candidates are independents.

Summary of findings:
There are in all 50 women candidates (5.82%) in the fray in the third phase.
There are 118 candidates who have pending criminal cases against them.
Among the major political parties SP has 20 out of 56 (35.71%), BSP, 17 out of 57 (29.82%), BJP, 15 out of 51 (29.41%) INC, 13 out of 56 (23.21%) and RLD 9 out of 53 (16.98%) such candidates in the fray. There are 26 candidates with pending cases among the smaller political parties and 18 amongst the independents.
There are 23 candidates who were members of the outgoing assembly and had pending criminal cases against them. Out of these 18 candidates have not mentioned about these cases in their current affidavits.
There are 8 constituencies which have more than 4 candidates who have pending criminal cases against them. These are: Amroha (9) –6 candidates, Bareilly Cant (35) –6; Bilaspur (22)—5; Dadraul (49)—5; Moradabad (17) –5; Nawabganj (37)—4; Rampur (21)—4; Sunha (33) –4 candidates.
There are 60 candidates who have declared assets worth more than Rs 1 Crore.
SP leads the list with 14, BSP, 10, INC, 9, BJP,6 and RLD, 4. The INC candidate from Puranpur (const.44) is the richest with a declared asset of Rs. 374.80 Crores.
Accordingly the average candidate asset list is led by INC for the third phase.
There are 18 candidates who have more than Rs 4 lakhs liability but do not have PAN.
There are 626 candidates out of 859 (72.88%) who do not have PAN. RLD leads the list with 67.92% of such candidates. Among the smaller parties 83.98% candidates have not given PAN. Among these LJP has 7 out of 8 (87.50%); IJP has 13 out of 15 (86.66%); Janmorchha , 11 out of 13 (84.61%), RJD, 10 out of 12 (83.33%); and Lokdal 13 out of 16 ( 81.25%).
There are 4 candidates who have declared that they have NIL assets.

The UP Election Watch is a non-partisan civil society alliance for clean politics and accountable governance. Collection of affidavits, collation of information contained there in, and dissemination among voters of this information before the voting day are voluntary civil society efforts. This is intended to enable the voter to make an informed and responsible choice while casting their votes. It is to be remembered that in a democracy there is no position higher than that of the CITIZEN.

The UPEW, along with 200 CBOs/NGOs created a network of citizens across the state for this purpose.

The process has been initiated in the state by Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) which is engaged in strengthening democracy in the country through political and electoral reforms.

A high level committee of concerned eminent citizens of UP has been formed to lead this process. This committee is convened by Sri I.C. Dwivedi, Retd DGP.

People's Vigilance committee on Human Rights (PVCHR) has become the coordinating body of the whole process. PVCHR has been involved with the cause of hunger, malnutrition, education, health and governance for the most marginalized and voiceless section of Indian society.

The data has been culled from the affidavits submitted by candidates along with their nomination papers. We have tried our best to be accurate and non-partisan in presenting the data. In case of doubt, please consult the Election Commission’s website, www.eci.gov.in .

DR. Lenin Bibhu Mohapatra
www.pvchr.org www.adrindia.org
14 April 2007

Data of 2nd Phase:UP Election Watch

Summary Note
UP Election Watch

ADR PVCHR

candidates in the fray in phase II, with 402 Independents, 179 belonging to minor political parties and 279 belonging to major political parties. The average number of candidates contesting per constituency is 14.86, much higher than the average for the 2002 Assembly and 2004 Parliamentary elections in the state. The UP election watch took into consideration 792 candidates leaving out some independents whose affidavits were either blank or badly scanned.

Summary of findings:
There are 30 women candidates out of the 792 taken into account, merely 3.78%. BSP, a party headed by a woman, has not fielded a single woman as candidate in this phase.
The sex ratio in these 10 Districts are the worst in the country. In an era of demand for progressive legislation to secure women’s participation in governance, this is an unfortunate indicator.
Out of 792 candidates, 102 have pending criminal cases against them.
BSP leads the list of such candidates with 18 out of 58 (31.03%), followed by BJP, 14 out of 57 (24.56%), RLD, 11 out of 51 (22%), SP, 12 out of 56 (21.43%) and INC, 9 out of 57 (16.07%).
If we consider the combined percentage of candidates fielded by main political parties, in phase 1 and 2, BSP leads the pack with 33.33%, followed by BJP—27.03%, SP—26.50%, and INC—20.17% This brings the overall percentage of such candidates fielded by main parties to 25.65%, that is, one in four candidates put up by major political parties has pending criminal cases against him/her.
There are 14 candidates who were members of the previous Assembly and according to the affidavit submitted by the UP Home Secretary to the High Court, had pending criminal cases against them. Among the major parties BJP and BSP account for 3 each and RLD and SP for 2 each of such candidates. Apart from one BJP and one BSP candidate, the rest have stated figures in their current affidavits, which are different from the UP Govt.’s affidavit figures. There are 5 candidates in this list who have declared that they have no pending criminal cases, but according to the Govt affidavit have serious cases pending against them. RLD, SP, and BJP account for one each in this category.
The top ten list of candidates, arranged according to number of cases, is headed by Amar Singh Yadav of BSP, contesting from Sikandra Rao (354), with 11 pending criminal cases. BSP has 4 candidates who have made it to this list.
According to the Govt affidavit, Madan Bhaiya of RLD, contesting from Khekra (384) has 59 pending criminal cases against him, followed by Rajpal Singh Saini of BSP (Morna-391) with 26 cases and Ramvir Upadhyay (Hathras-352), of the same party with 12 pending cases.
There are six constituencies, which have 4 or more candidates with pending criminal cases. These are, Gangari (355) 6, Sikandarabad (370) 5, Mathura (347) 4, Hathras (352) 4, Morna (391) 4, and Thana Bhawan (396) 4. The high number of candidates with criminal cases pending constrains the Voter’s choice. But it is the voter who has to find a way out.
A note of caution for the voter. UP leads the list of parliamentarians with pending criminal cases (21 out of 80) in the country. UP also leads in the statistics of murder and violent crimes committed in the country in the past year. The 10 Districts going to polls in the second phase account for about 30% of such crimes with 14.62% of the state’s total population. During the assembly elections in 2002, there were 506 candidates in the fray, with pending criminal cases against them. Out of these, 206 became MLAs. This means 51.11% of the previous assembly members, that is, every second member in that house, had pending criminal cases against him or her.
There are 126 candidates (15.91%) who have declared assets worth more than a crore.
Among the major parties, BSP has 29/58(50%), RLD, 20/51(39.22%) BJP, 20/57(35.09%), SP, 19/56 (33.93%), and INC, 12/57 (21.05%) candidates who are Crorepatis.
In the top ten list, arranged according to declared total wealth, 3 SP, 2 each from BSP and BJP, and one each from INC, RLD and BKD candidates make the cut.
The average assets of a main party candidate has gone up sizably this time round. The list is topped by SP with an average declared asset worth Rs 1.64 Crores, followed by, BSP, Rs. 1.36 Crores, BJP, Rs.1.15 Crores, RLD, Rs. 1.12 Crores, and INC, Rs. 0.97 Crores.
The role of money power in the electoral arena is very distinct. This makes the contest uneven.
The top ten list of high liabilities is headed by the INC candidate from Muzaffarnagar (392), Saiduzzaman. Interestingly, though his loans are more than Rs.2 crores, he does not possess PAN.
In this phase the average liability of a party candidate makes interesting reading. Among the major political parties, INC heads the group with an average liability of Rs 9.44 lakhs, followed by SP, Rs 6.57 Lakhs, BJP, 6.45 Lakhs, RLD, 4.57 Lakhs, and BSP, Rs 4.57 lakhs.
There are 509 candidates out of 792 (64.27%) who do not have PAN.
Among the major political parties, RLD has 45.10% candidates, INC, 42.11%, BJP, 40.35%, SP, 37.50%, and BSP, 36.21% candidates who do not have PAN.
Interestingly, when we look at the list of candidates who have declared assets worth more than a crore, we find that, 10 BSP candidates, 5 each from SP and RLD, 3 BJP, 2 INC and 1 Janmorcha candidate do not have PAN.
Similarly, when we look at the list of candidates with high liabilities, 4 BSP, 2 each from BJP and INC, and 1 each from RLD and SP do not possess PAN.
When we look at the educational; profile of candidates, we see that there is a marked increase among major political parties in putting up candidates who are highly educated. BJP leads the list with 68.42%, followed by INC, 59.65%, SP, 50%, and BSP, 44.83% candidates who are graduates and above.
Similarly, there is a marked preference by main political parties for candidates who are younger. Almost 90% candidates belonging to main political parties are below 60 years of age. And the bulk belongs to the category between 41-60.

The UP Election Watch is a non-partisan civil society alliance for clean politics and accountable governance. Collection of affidavits, collation of information contained there in, and dissemination among voters of this information before the voting day are voluntary civil society efforts. This is intended to enable the voter to make an informed and responsible choice while casting their votes. It is to be remembered that in a democracy there is no position higher than that of the CITIZEN.
The UPEW, along with 200 CBOs/NGOs created a network of citizens across the state for this purpose.

The process has been initiated in the state by Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) which is engaged in strengthening democracy in the country through political and electoral reforms.

A high level committee of concerned eminent citizens of UP has been formed to lead this process. This committee is convened by Sri I.C. Dwivedi, Retd DGP.

People's Vigilance committee on Human Rights (PVCHR) has become the coordinating body of the whole process. PVCHR has been involved with the cause of hunger, malnutrition, education, health and governance for the most marginalized and voiceless section of Indian society.



The data has been culled from the affidavits submitted by candidates along with their nomination papers. We have tried our best to be accurate and non-partisan in presenting the data. In case of doubt, please consult the Election Commission’s website, www.eci.gov.in .


9 April 2007.

UP election Watch First Phase Data

Summary Note
UP Election Watch 2007
1st Phase Data

ADR PVCHR

UP Election Watch is a non-partisan body of citizens engaged in creating avenues of better participation of citizens in the Governance process. We believe that by exercising an informed choice the voters/citizens can create a momentum for an accountable and response system.

The UPEW, along with 200 CBOs/NGOs created a network of citizens across the state for this purpose.

The process has been initiated in the state by Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) which is engaged in strengthening democracy in the country through political and electoral reforms.

People’s Vigilance committee on Human Rights (PVCHR) has become the coordinating body of the whole process. PVCHR has been involved with the cause of hunger, malnutrition, education, health and governance for the most marginalized and voiceless section of Indian society.

Many civil society organizations are part of the UPEW. For the constituencies that are going to the polls in the first phase of UP assembly elections, the contribution of network partners like Apada Niwaran Manch,Parmarth samaj santhan, Pahuj Vikas manch are worth a mention. Without the relentless efforts of such network partners’ collection of affidavits would have been impossible.

Following the Supreme Court judgment on candidate’s disclosure, it was the responsibility of the Civil Society to see that clean and responsive candidates are elected. Such a task could not be left to the political parties who across the board put up candidates with pending criminal records and are themselves non-transparent in financial and internal functioning matter.

UPEW collected affidavits of 785 candidates contesting in the 62 assembly seats that are going to the polls in first phase.
· 131 candidates had pending criminal cases against them
· Among the major political parties BSP led the pack with 22/62 (35.48%) closely followed by SP 19/61(31.15%), BJP 16/54 (29.63%) and INC 15/62 (24.20%).
· 32 seats in the first phase were earlier (2002) occupied by people with serious criminal charges. This time round 11 of them have not mentioned any criminal cases pending against them. According to the UP Government website all of them have pending cases.
· There are seven constituencies which have more that five candidates with pending cases. This are Jasrana,Hamirpur, Firozabad,Lalitpur,Agara Cantt, Kanpur and Aliganj.
· 509 (64.84%) candidates did not have PAN. Among political parties INC led with 35.48%, BSP 32.25%, SP 31.14% and BJP 24.07 %.
· There were 74 candidates who declared assets worth more than Rupees one crore. SP led the team with 17 such candidates followed by BSP 14, BJP 14, and INC 11.
· The average assets of a SP candidate were 87.23 lacs, BJP 79.32 lacs, INC 58.88 Lacs and BSP 55.00Lacs.
· Among the top ten candidates with high liabilities one INC candidate with 30 lacs loan did not even posses PAN.

The above data and enclosed information have been culled from affidavits provided by candidates at the time of nominations. These are accessible at www.eci.gov.in. For accuracy of the data please check this website. Volunteers of PVCHR are not responsible for any error.

Note: The data is in excel- sheets containing several pages, please go through them.

Prof. Trilochan Shastry

Coming Assembly Elections: Nature of parties and governance
Trilochan Sastry
Professor, Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore
and Founder Member, Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR)
January 20, 2007

The coming Assembly elections in the 5 States of Punjab, UP, Uttarakhand, Goa and Manipur once again bring into focus the nature of politics and governance today. In intellectual circles, the debate is about the ideology and policies of a party, and its stand on various issues like the free market, socialism, globalization, secularism, communalism, economic growth, poverty eradication and so on. They also evaluate how well policies and programs are implemented. In more informal circles, people talk about massive corruption in government, and the misuse of money and muscle power in elections. Fortunately, information on candidates is now available publicly, and it throws light on the quality of governance we can realistically expect. The recent Supreme Court Judgments of May 2002 and March 2003 now mandate such disclosure by all candidates.

Of the 102 seats in these 5 states, the major parties alone had 83 (81%) candidates formally charged with a crime. Many are accused of murder, attempt to murder, dacoity, forgery and financial fraud. Party leaders decide who gets a ticket to contest and are directly responsible for this state of affairs. Unfortunately, the situation is worse since there are many more Independent contestants who are similarly charged. It also does not include those who may indulge in fraud but have not been formally charged. The recent convictions of a Minister in the UPA government and an opposition MP are only the tip of the iceberg.

Lok Sabha 2004: Contestants from the 5 States going to the polls


UP
Punjab
Uttarakhand
Manipur
Goa
Overall
Total Seats
80
13
5
2
2
102
No. charged with crime
71
6
4
0
2
83
Percent
88.8%
46.2%
80.0%
0.0%
100.0%
81.4%

Uttar Pradesh, the State with the largest Vidhan Sabha (403) sends 80 members to the Lok Sabha. The Samajwadi Party (SP) fielded 66 candidates of which 22 had criminal charges against them, with 13 accused of violent crimes ranging from murder to dacoity. The BSP had 78, 21 and 15 respectively. The two major National political parties had 15% or less of candidates with criminal charges. Out of 293 candidates contesting on behalf of these four parties, 63 had criminal cases (21.5%), of which 34 contestants were accused of violent crimes.

In Punjab, out of 10 candidates from the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) in the Lok Sabha 2004 Elections, 2 had criminal charges against them. The Shiromani Akali Dal (Mann) had 6 and 2, the Bharatiya Janata Party had 3 and 1, the Congress had 11 and 0, and SP had 3 and 0 respectively. Uttarakhand carved out of Uttar Pradesh has 5 Parliamentary Constituencies and 70 Vidhan Sabha seats. Out of 5 candidates put up by SP, 2 had criminal charges against them. The Shiv Sena had 2 and 1, and the CPI (ML), 3 and 1 respectively. A similar situation prevails in Manipur and Goa.

Lok Sabha 2004: Political Parties and Crime in the 5 States
Political Party
Total No. of Candidates
No. of Candidates with Criminal Charges
% of Candidates with Criminal Charges
Samajwadi Party
74
24
32.4%
Bahujan Samaj Party
78
21
26.9%
Indian National Congress
85
9
10.6%
Bharatiya Janata Party
83
13
15.7%
SAD
10
2
20.0%
SAD (Mann)
6
2
33.3%
Left
19
5
26.3%

The data also reveal that many candidates do not declare their PAN number and claim that they have nil or very little assets. Data from other Assembly elections held after May 2002 in Bihar, Maharashtra, AP, Gujarat, Karnataka, Orissa, Delhi, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand and West Bengal clearly show that the level of criminalization and false declarations is far worse in the Assembly elections compared to the Lok Sabha polls.

Why are we in this situation and what kind of governance can we expect? Where do we go from here? Many analysts state publicly, and a few politicians privately, that mounting election expenses is the mother of all corruption since the crores spent by someone on getting elected have to be recovered after winning. Starting from Bofors, which was a mere Rs.64 crores, we moved to the Telgi scam, estimated to be in several tens of thousands of crores. Clearly, good governance cannot be a priority in this situation no matter what the ideology or policy. The few capable and honest leaders at the top have a Hobson’s choice: try for good governance from what they know is a corrupt system, or look outside the Government to the private sector. With such levels of corruption, privatization leads to an unholy nexus between money and political power as happened in several other countries. The rush for massive infrastructure projects perhaps opens up more avenues for large scale corruption. Good governance is therefore a sine qua non whether we opt for the free market or for a direct attack on poverty with distributive justice. Party leaders who themselves are not corrupt have to field clean, capable candidates. Some far sighted leader will have to call the bluff that voters only elect those who spend a lot of money. It remains to be seen whether the political system throws up that kind of visionary leadership first or whether public exposure and outcry forces them to change in the long run.