Political Diary
New Delhi, 10 May, 2014
Election Commission
Halla Bol
BJP FORGETS THE
CONSTITUTION
By Poonam I Kaushish
Phew, finally the last vote has been cast and the very last
ballot box sealed in a theekha-dhoondhar
no-holds barred electioneering season. Peppered by ‘murdererous’ entertainment:
Intimidation, bullying, fear and terror and spiced with neechi and tuch vitriolic rajneeti.
Forgotten in the din and fury is the commendable unbiased role played by the
Election Commission. Till, the BJP’s assault on it, deftly countered by the
EC’s halla bol and refusal to succumb.
Predictably, all hell
broke lose when the Saffron Sangh lambasted the Commission for over-reaching its powers and
denying its Prime Ministerial candidate Modi from holding a rally at his Lok
Sabha constituency Varanasi constituency. Hurling abuses by calling it
pro-Congress, anti-Hindu with its retinue of ‘casteist’ officers.
Asserting if the Commission could not provide security, why
didn’t it defer the poll? What about the District Magistrate circumventing
facts: Verbally allowing a public rally on 5 May, rejecting it the next day on
the facetious grounds that Benia Bagh was booked by a Mr Khan and later citing
security concerns. No matter that both AAP’s Kejriwal and Samajwadi’s Akhilesh
Yadav had done so earlier. Only to relent on 8 May by offering an alternate
cite.
This is not all. The BJP slammed the EC for allowing Rahul
Gandhi's roadshow at an area in Varanasi
where NaMo was refused permission for his a rally. Add to this it reeled out
instances of booth-capturing in central and eastern Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal. It also cited the cases of parents and
children living in the same house who were assigned three different booths, far
from each other. Topped by EC faltering in exercising due diligence vis-à-vis the electoral rolls whereby
over three lakh voters names were
missing from Maharashtra’s and several UP districts and constituencies.
Undoubtedly, there have been many occasions during elections
when leaders have disagreed with the EC diktats,
criticised its directives topped by accusations of favouring rivals. But it is
for the first time that a Party has protested against the Nirvachan Sadan
openly accusing it of bias against the BJP. Simply because Varanasi’s Returning Officer denied citing
security reasons.
But the moot point is:
Was the Saffron Sangh justified in surmising that the Election
Commission per se was prejudiced
against Modi only in Varanasi? Why not in the other constituencies he has
canvassed and held large rallies? Did the Commissioners compromise the
impartiality and independence of the EC?
Is the EC’s powers limited to that an important referee blowing an empty
whistle? Can the Commission be a law unto itself?
Pertinently, over the years the EC has been lauded for the
remarkable way it has conducted polls, that too without many complaints of
rigging or other poll irregularities barring violations of the moral conduct
which are rising election after election. Kudos to it for its catchy advertisements
resulting in increased voter turn-out.
Interestingly, this is not the first time the BJP has carped
about the Commission and what it perceives as its unpalatable decisions.
Remember, Chief Election Commissioner’s JM. Lyngdoh’s run-in with Modi’s
Gujarat Government in 2002? And, how he thwarted the State Government's attempt
at early elections.
In July 2002, Governor SS Bhandari dissolved the Gujarat
Assembly nine months before expiry of its term paving the way for elections. The
CEC was unmoved and refused to heed Modi’s plea that post Godhra the State was
free of communal tension resulting in a legal battle. In October, the Supreme
Court upheld Lyngdoh’s order to defer Assembly elections.
In the interim, the CEC also deftly countered Modi’s
personal attacks, “Has Lyngdoh come from Italy”, insinuating that the reason
the Commission had delayed holding the polls was because Lyngdoh was a
Christian. Countered the CEC, “I am an atheist…it is quite despicable and
gossip of menials for attacking me on religious grounds”.
Alas, for reasons best known to it, the Hindutva brigade has
once again chosen confrontation with the EC as its strategy for its campaign
climax. Despite getting the EC’s nod to perform aarti to Hindu’s holiest river Mother Ganga he dropped the idea in
protest against the Commission’s denial of permission to hold a rally.
Leading one to surmise, that Modi only wanted to invoke his
Hindutva roots, offer public worship and garner votes. By showcasing itself as
the victim, the BJP tried to use its attacks against the EC to position its
Hindutva semiotics for last-minute electoral gains. Nothing stopped him from
doing so privately a la Kejriwal sans
the frenzied paraphernalia and jamboree.
Moreover, is the BJP unaware that this violates Section
123.3 of the Representation of the People Act, which bars appeal on the basis
of religion or use of religious symbols to secure votes?
Clearly, the Sangh has cut off its nose to spite its face. By
locking horns with the custodian of our electoral process it has exposed that
its strategy was purely to earn brownie points by harping on its Hindutva roots
in terms of electoral appeal. This form of brinkmanship was wholly unnecessary.
Modi and his Party need to realize that politics goes beyond electioneering,
sagacity and statesmanship lies in crafting a post poll campaign that fortifies
rather than vitiates the larger, post-poll polity.
In sum the right to hold free and fair elections is fundamental
to democracy with the Constitution empowering the EC with absolute powers under
Article 324. Which states: “The superintendence, direction and control of the
preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of all elections to
Parliament and to the Legislatures of every State …. Shall be vested in the
Election Commission”
Undeniably Chief Election Commissioners such as T N Seshan,
N Gopalaswamy and James Lyngdoh, MS Gill pushed forward the frontiers of what
the Election Commission can do. Rigid enforcement of the model code of conduct
by ‘Bulldog’ T N Seshan made Governments and netas afraid of the Commission. This helped in ensuring fair
elections. Gopalaswamy streamlined the system and Lyngdoh ensured that even in
Jammu & Kashmir elections were honestly held after a long history of
rigging.
All have steadily, without fuss taken steps to deepen
democracy. But at the same time for future polls, the Election Commission
should be more alert, closely monitor field-level decisions and deal with
complaints against its officials with a greater sense of urgency.
Clearly, even as all eyes and action shifts to who sits on
India’s Raj gaddi, are Parties need
to realize that were it not for our Constitutional institutions holding
steadfast the country could descent into mayhem and anarchy. ---- INFA
(Copyright India News & Feature
Alliance)
|