Open
Forum
New Delhi, 25 April 2019
Poll Management Body
NEED TO SHARPEN TEETH
By Dr S Saraswathi
(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)
A rude shock was given to the Indian
democratic government when the Election Commission of India admitted in the
Supreme Court that it was “toothless” and did not have enough powers to act
against religious and hate speeches during the on-going poll campaigns.
The court was hearing a petition on
increasing hate and divisive speeches in the name of religion in poll campaigns.
The petition sought a close watch on the poll process and the fairness of the
Election Commission by a committee headed by a former judge of the Supreme
Court. After several instances of hate speeches, unsubstantiated accusations,
religious provocations, twisting of facts, half truths and blank lies, the EC sent
notices only in three cases.
The Supreme Court gave 24 hours time to the
EC to explain its powers under the law against “candidates who spew vitriol”. Referring
to EC’s submission that its powers were limited to sending notices and
advisories to offending candidates and filing civil and criminal complaints in
case of violation of Moral Code of Conduct (MCC), the Court decided to examine
EC’s powers in detail.
Rejecting the plea of “standing instructions”
governing their functioning, the court reminded the EC that time was limited
and it had to act promptly.
The election atmosphere is deteriorating day
by day and speeches pour venom and hatred between rival parties and candidates.
But, the Commission put a ban on only four senior political leaders from
campaigning for two to three days for making speeches violating the MCC. The
bar prevented them from giving interviews or making comments on electronic,
print or social media on election-related matters during the bar period.
Never before in the Indian experience, a General
election has drawn public attention as much as the present 17th Lok
Sabha election due mostly to heightened awareness of the citizens. Having
earned world-wide acclaim for peaceful, orderly, and regular election, India
bears a heavy responsibility to safeguard its reputation. To fulfil this, the
country depends much on the system and functioning of the election management
body -- the ECI.
Starting as a low profile political activity
in 1952, the General election has gradually gained extraordinary political
significance as the most important political event. Throughout the year,
somewhere election is going on keeping this body busy. It is an amazing
political development in which the ECI has a preeminent role.
Conducting an election in a big country with
a federal set up is a complicated administrative operation. Complications grow
in surcharged political atmosphere and have reached a peak today where parties
stake everything to get into places of power or influence and some speakers tend
to lose control over their tongue in their efforts to brainwash the voters. The
election managerial body in charge of organising and conducting the event, therefore,
becomes the focal point of appeals and attacks from all sides.
Control, management and conduct of elections
to Parliament and State legislatures and to the offices of the President and
Vice-President of the country are vested by the Constitution in the EC. Created
as a single member body in 1950, it became a three-member body in 1990 and a
three-member Commission in 1993. Election Commissioners are in status equal to
Supreme Court judges.
The power vested in the Commission is limited
to election-related matters like preparation of voter lists, delimitation of
constituencies, registration and recognition of parties, conducting elections,
counting of votes and declaration of results. It is in charge of implementing
the Moral Code of Conduct in campaigns. In these specified areas, the EC is the
real master.
When the Constitution was in the making and
when it came into operation, nobody would have imagined that EC would be
burdened with extraordinary weight of democratic responsibilities. Indeed, the position of the Election
Commission is unenviable.
Today, every election for Parliament or Assembly,
a General election or a by-election, is a testing time for the EC. It has to
face numerous challenges in its work from many players including political
parties, pressure groups, candidates, and voters. Implementing the MCC is a
full-time job for the Commission these days as violations have become the rule
for some parties and adherence to the Code an exception. This, despite the fact
that the Code has been framed by the Commission in consultation with political
parties and not imposed on them from an external authority!
However, the Code is not law and cannot be
enforced in a court of law. When any action which is violation of the Code is
also an offence under any law, the EC can recommend registration of a case
against the person/party concerned. EC’s notice to any parties for violation of
the Code invariably receives prompt response indicating that that there is
general acknowledgement of EC’s authority.
The Code’s effectiveness comes from the EC’s
active and prompt intervention as poll watch and not from successful
prosecution of cases of violations. Violations do take place taking advantage of relaxed atmosphere and limitless
number of cases and perhaps with a false hope that action would not be taken
against politically important people. Most importantly, Code violations in
several cases produce their effects immediately. Violation is an infectious
disease and spreads fast.
Sending notices to erring candidates and
following it with advisories is not without effect. Identifying and naming a culprit and asking
for explanation are enough in many instances to curb repeat offences. It is
absence of questions from concerned authorities that encourages culprits to
multiply offences without fear. The EC may not have very sharp teeth to
permanently damage the culprits, but certainly has enough powers to bend them
into submission.
The EC’s power is substantial. It has many
times postponed an election already announced and can even abrogate an election
already held. In 2012, the EC cancelled a Rajya Sabha election in Jharkhand
after polling on the ground that candidates were bribing voters. Polling in Vellore
in Tamil Nadu has been countermanded in the present General election following
discovery of huge sums of money for distribution to voters. The Madras High
Court has confirmed that the court cannot interfere in the EC’s decision.
However, the EC cannot disqualify a candidate
for any misconduct, but can only recommend filing of cases and cannot
deregister a party. It can decide on holding an office of profit, or acquiring
foreign citizenship which would disqualify a candidate. Its decision is final.
The EC has been subject to criticism from
parties and candidates and has even sought power to award punishment for civil
and criminal contempt. Accusations against the EC’s functioning are common. The
EVM has come under severe criticism. The Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail
(VVPAT) system has been introduced, which prints a slip showing the name of the
candidate, voter serial number, and poll symbol when a vote is cast.
The EC has substantial powers in
election-related questions. It has detected crores of money intended to
purchase votes in this election. It has to sharpen its teeth by use and be
ready to bite.---INFA
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
|