Context:

• The Citizens’ Commission on Elections (CCE), which examines critical aspects of conducting elections, released the second part of its report.
• Titled “An Inquiry into India’s Election System,” the report evaluated the integrity and inclusiveness of the electoral rolls, increasing criminalisation, the use of financial power to create an economic oligarchy, compliance with the model code of conduct, the role of media, particularly social media and the overall electoral process.

Details:

• Its overall verdict: A damning indictment of the autonomy of the Election Commission of India.
• Flagging 2019 as the flashpoint from whence grave doubts were raised about the freedom and fairness of India’s general elections — the world’s largest democratic exercise — the CCE alleged that the ECI was drifting away from Article 324, which gives the Commission plenipotentiary powers to steer the electoral process.

Background:

• In 1952, free India went to the polls for the first time, choosing to dive straight into universal adult suffrage.
• Sukumar Sen, India’s first Chief Election Commissioner, had to construct the electoral framework from scratch.
• This meant ensuring that 176 million citizens, nearly 85 per cent of whom were illiterate, would have a say in the democratic effort.
• It meant choosing symbols for political parties and sites for polling stations; it meant introducing indelible ink to prevent fraud and plotting ways to cover every inch of India’s vast, often difficult terrain.
• Between 1990-1996, as the 10th Election Commissioner, Seshan implemented the model code of conduct, reining in muscle and monetary power in elections.
• Seshan prohibited election propaganda based on religion and caste-based hatred, cancelling the Punjab elections in 1991 to ensure that the poll process was not vitiated by violence.
• Lyngdoh presided over the institution from 2001 to 2004 — an unenviable time to be CEC, with riots in Gujarat in 2002.
• There was reportedly immense pressure on the EC to hold elections earlier than intended, but Lyngdoh held out, insisting that polls could not be held when the state had not yet recovered from the violence of the riots.

Present:

• Cut to 2019, with the EC announcing seven phase elections during the peak of summer, there were allegations that the EC had handed out clean chits despite provocative political statements.
• The agency informed an outraged Supreme Court that its powers were limited against candidates who made hate and religious speeches during the election campaign.
• The apex court’s query pertaining to public trust in the ECI remains relevant as West Bengal goes to the polls in a controversial eight phase election.
• The first report of the Citizens’ Commission on Elections had come out on January 30, but there has been radio silence from the ECI.
• Remarking on the silence, Wajahat Habibullah, vice-chair of the CCE, observed that while earlier CECs would offer the Commission their time to discuss its reports, there was an air of closed doors around the political and civic edifices at this time.

Conclusion:

• Between 1975 to 1977, democracy was suspended altogether when Indira Gandhi declared Emergency. Yet, elections have continued to be held, stoked by popular faith in a concept which the EC not only symbolises, but has a duty to implement.
• The success story of India’s first general election is one that deserves to be remembered – for its scope, its scale, the logistics and social issues involved in constructing an enduring civic edifice.

https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/election-commission-of-india-autonomy-powers-7238870/

Download PDF