Delhi: Why BJP would not bother to poach AAP's MLAs

Aam Aadmi Party MLA Madan Lal shot to instant celebrity-hood on Monday afternoon. Lal, who holds a MA and a LLB degree from MMH College, Meerut University, on Monday announced that he had been offered a hefty bribe by intermediaries of Narendra Modi and Arun Jaitley to defect and dissolve the AAP government. He said that he had been offered Rs 30 crore in cash and the post of Delhi’s chief minister if he managed to break the AAP government. Every MLA he manages to get with him would be given Rs 10 core, he declared.   “Only a principled man like me could say no to them,” said Lal about the ‘intermediaries’ he refused to name. Despite the serious nature of the AAP’s claims, the incident reeks of sensationalism for more reasons than one. Maybe the AAP is trying to cash in on the wave of cynicism against established political traditions by lobbing big accusations against big names in India’s contemporary politics. However, it is easy to see the various lapses in logic in their body of allegations. Arun Jaitley rejected AAP’s claims saying, " Rubbish claims by AAP. AAP’s alternative politics includes a fundamental right to falsehood and lies." And there’s probably some truth in that.   [caption id=“attachment_1372213” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Arvind Kejriwal during his oath taking ceremony. Agencies.[/caption] MLA Madanlal and an entire battery of AAP leaders want people to believe that Jaitley, who is an eminent lawyer and Modi, who has been a state’s chief minister for 12 years, aren’t aware of the existence of the Anti-Defection law. The Hindu states that the 10th Schedule to the Constitution, popularly referred to as the ‘Anti-Defection Law,’ was inserted by the 52nd Amendment in 1985. “The grounds of disqualification are specified in Paragraph 2 of the 10th Schedule. A member would incur a disqualification under paragraph 2 (1) (a) when he “voluntarily gives up his membership of a party” and under 2 (1) (b) when he/she votes (or abstains from voting) contrary to the directive issued by the party.” Even if the law fails to make defection impossible, it does make it very difficult. Another argument that makes AAP’s claims difficult to believe is why would the BJP risk poaching AAP MLAs in the first place? Even if manages to break the AAP government and prove that no political party is immune to the evils they themselves are assumed to be guilty of, the party will only end up looking corrupt and unprincipled enough. Why would they leave Dr Harsh Vardhan in the cold and choose Madan Lal as the state’s CM candidate? Rest assured, a move like that would completely derail BJP’s anti-nepotism, anti-corruption stance that is being steered by Narendra Modi. In fact, such a move would even risk Modi’s Prime Ministerial prospects. Despite what Madan Lal claims, the fact remains that as per constitutional provisions, Lal and the nine MLAs would only lose their seats. They could form a breakaway group only if two-thirds of the legislators of parliamentarians split and formed a separate entity – if 19 of 27 AAP MLAs had revolted, not any less. Surely Madan Lal, who holds an LLB degree, would know that. Madan Lal claimed that he was approached by ‘intermediaries’ three times on behalf of Modi and Jaitley. The first call he received was on December 7, midnight. This was the night before the Delhi poll results were revealed. The call couldn’t be traced. So, presumably this caller knew that Madan Lal would win. Madanlal, evidently, is not following his leader, Kejriwal who had exhorted all residents of Delhi through various means that corruption should be reported by all means. In fact, he suggested Delhiites conduct a sting when approached for bribes. Why then Madan Lal is not following the advice? These ‘intermediaries’ - an advocate and two persons who claimed to be from Gujarat - have not been named yet. Forget performing a sting, he even seems to have forgotten his name.  Do AAP’s ideas then not apply to the party members themselves?