In the bad old days of jungle raj in Bihar, elections were calculated not on the basis of who got more votes, but on which party was able to capture the maximum number of ballot boxes and election booths. The simple law was that ‘might is right’ and muscle power ruled. Officers of the Election Commission (EC) were deployed, but they were immobilised by the threat of violence, or themselves compromised.
The advent of T.N. Seshan, Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) for six crucial years, from December 1990 to December 1996, helped to significantly improve matters. He was a tough administrator and came down heavily on malpractices such as bribing and intimidation of voters, distribution of alcohol, use of government machinery or agencies for electioneering, appealing to voter’s caste or communal feelings, misuse of places of worship for campaigning, and use of loudspeakers and high-volume music without written permission. He also insisted on the strict enforcement of an election code of conduct, where voters had to produce valid ID cards, the expenditure of candidates was monitored, and officials were deputed for election duty from outside the state where elections were being held.
During his tenure, 1488 candidates were disqualified for not submitting their expenditure accounts, and 14,000 debarred for providing false information. Political parties, leaders and candidates were mortally afraid of his ethical inflexibility. In fact, in 1992, he cancelled the entire elections in Bihar and Punjab for violations of the electoral code.
Since then, there have been further developments to enhance the impartiality and transparency of the voting process. Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) were introduced in a phased manner in national and Assembly elections between 1998 and 2001. The EC has repeatedly claimed that these are tamper-free, and while allegations have been made to the contrary on occasions by some Opposition parties, to my mind, there does not appear any concrete evidence to support such accusations.
In 2012, pursuant to a Supreme Court directive, the EC commenced the ‘voter verified paper audit trail’ (VVPAT), and this was made mandatory for all state and national elections starting 2019. The SC also directed that a small random sampling of all EVMs should be done to remove any doubt about their being fully tamper-proof.
However, while these are welcome reforms, much more remains to be done. The nexus of unaccountable money with politics, and its massive use in elections, is one unresolved malaise, as is the continuing role of muscle power. But to my mind, the biggest weakness is the absence of a Seshan-like figure to bolster the EC. The EC, and its vital role in impartially, fearlessly and rigorously supervising the electoral process, seems to be greatly enfeebled. One glaring example of this is the role—or the absence of it—that the EC played during the scandalous rigging of the recent Mayoral elections of Chandigarh.
Anil Masih, the Returning Officer of these elections—a former BJP worker—was caught red-handed on CCTV camera rigging the election by tampering with the voting slips in favour of the BJP. The Opposition INDI alliance had 20 votes in its favour and the BJP had 16. Masih defaced eight of the INDI alliance votes, ensuring a victory for the BJP candidate. The Alliance then approached the SC, which on seeing the CCTV footage and examining the ballot papers, overturned the outcome, declared the Opposition alliance candidate the winner, and ordered criminal prosecution of Masih. But for the SC, and the fortuitous working of a CCTV machine, an election at the Mayoral level would have been literally stolen in full public glare without anyone being the wiser.
Throughout this ‘murder of democracy’, which played out under full media glare, the silence of the EC was deafening. If a Seshan was at the helm, he would have got the state wing of the EC cracking the whip within minutes, and it may not have even been necessary for the aggrieved parties to approach the SC. It is interesting that in the short period in which the judicial proceedings were on, three AAP councillors, who had vehemently protested the rigging of the elections, mysteriously switched sides to the BJP. This was, prima facie, a case of blatant horse-trading. But once again, not a whiff of intervention—or even a query—from the EC.
The unfortunate truth appears to be that the EC has become a pale shadow of what it was under Seshan, consisting—with some exceptions—of compliant officers grateful for their appointment by the government.
A strong and independent EC is imperative for preserving the credentials of the world’s largest democracy. But this is easier said than done. The SC, in a judgement of March 2023, had proposed that Election Commissioners be selected by a committee consisting of the PM, the Leader of the Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India (CJI). The government, however, passed a law that omitted the CJI and made the third member a Union minister nominated by the PM. The government, therefore, will always have the majority in appointing the three Election Commissioners.
Why should any ruling party have the right to ensure the composition of the EC, especially when, under the Constitution, it is an independent body? The government should relook at the decision it has taken. Already, the manner in which the BJP appears to be complicit in the rigged Mayor’s election in Chandigarh, and the horse-trading that has followed, has shaken the confidence of citizens in the fairness of the democratic process.
The author is a former diplomat, an author and a politician. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18’s views.
Comments
0 comment