Q.Which do you agree with most, and why: legislators free to join any party / anti-defection law causes party-leader domination / defection always selfish, disqualify from ministership for 2 years.

Among the three views on the anti-defection law, the strongest case is that it has shifted real power away from individual legislators and into the hands of party leaders — this is exactly what the chapter's own review of the law's experience concludes. …

Three positions are offered: that legislators should be free to join any party they want; that the anti-defection law has increased the domination of party leaders over legislators; and that defection is always driven by selfish motives, so a defecting legislator should be barred from becoming a minister for two years.

The middle position — that the law has strengthened party-leader domination — is the one the chapter itself most directly supports. It states plainly that, twenty years on, the anti-defection amendment "has not been able to curb defections, but it has given additional powers to the party leadership and the presiding officers of the legislatures over the members." In other words, the law's actual, observed effect has been less about stopping the practice it targeted and more about tying an ordinary member's vote and presence in the House to the instructions of the party whip, since staying away against the party's wishes or voting against its instructions now counts as a punishable "defection." This concentrates real power in the party leadership's hands rather than leaving legislators to exercise independent judgement on the House floor. …