Sansad TV Perspective: Election Commission Reforms

In the series Sansad TV Perspective, we bring you an analysis of the discussion featured on the insightful programme ‘Perspective’ on Sansad TV, on various important topics affecting India and also the world. This analysis will help you immensely for the IAS exam, especially the mains exam, where a well-rounded understanding of topics is a prerequisite for writing answers that fetch good marks.

In this article, we feature the discussion on the topic: ‘Election Commision Reforms’.

Anchor: Vishal Dahiya

Participants:

1. OP Rawat, Former Chief Election Commissioner of India
2. Satya Prakash, Legal Editor, The Tribune
3. PK Malhotra, Former Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, GoI

Context: Supreme Court ruling on Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners.

Highlights of the Discussion:

1. Introduction
2. Judicial Overreach
3. Role of Supreme Court
4. Reforms 
5. Staffing and Financing of Election Commision

Introduction:

• A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court in Anoop Baranwal vs Union of India unanimously ruled that a high-power committee consisting of the Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition or the largest opposition party in Lok Sabha , and the Chief Justice of India must pick the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners. 
• The verdict came on a PIL filed in 2015 by challenging the constitutional validity of the practice of appointment of members of the Election Commission
  • In October 2018, a two-judge bench of the SC referred the case to a larger bench since it would require a close examination of Article 324 of the Constitution, which deals with the mandate of the Chief Election Commissioner. 
• The apex court also made it clear that this will be subject to any law to be made by Parliament on this issue. 
  • The government had argued that in the absence of such a law, the President has the constitutional power to make these appointments. 
• 20th Law Commission headed by Justice A P Shah (retd), in its 255th report on electoral reforms submitted in March 2015, had recommended a three-member collegium to appoint the CEC and the election commissioners. 

Read more on Supreme Court’s ruling

Judicial Overreach:

• The recent ruling resulted in a backlash from the electorate on social media.
• Many cited the idea of separation of powers, envisioned in the constitution, and how the Supreme Court, in the garb of pursuing neutrality within the election commission, was interfering in the jurisdiction of the elected representatives
• Several experts opined that the apex court restricted the government’s ability to appoint the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and other election commissioners in violation of Article 324. 

Supreme Court’s role in Election Commision’s Reforms:

• The Supreme Court of India has played a significant role in advocating for and enforcing reforms in the Election Commission of India. The court has repeatedly emphasized the importance of free and fair elections, and has issued several directives and guidelines to the Election Commission to ensure that the election process is transparent and unbiased.
• For instance, in 2013, the Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to include the option of “none of the above” (NOTA) in electronic voting machines and ballot papers. This was aimed at empowering voters who were dissatisfied with the candidates by providing them with a formal option to reject all candidates.
• Similarly, in 2018, the Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to provide candidates with a paper trail of their votes, known as Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT), to ensure the accuracy of electronic voting machines.
• In addition to these specific directives, the Supreme Court has also been vigilant in addressing complaints of election malpractices, including the use of money and muscle power to influence elections. It has directed the Election Commission to take action against such malpractices and has been instrumental in disqualifying candidates found guilty of such activities.
• Overall, the Supreme Court’s role in Election Commission of India’s reforms has been crucial in ensuring the integrity and fairness of the electoral process in the country.

Reforms in Election Commission of India:

• Reforms are necessary to strengthen the Election Commission of India and ensure the integrity of the electoral process in the country. 
• The ECI has been criticized for a range of issues, including the lack of transparency in political funding, the use of money and muscle power in elections, and the need for better voter education and awareness.
• ECI must introduce more transparency in political funding by making it mandatory for political parties to disclose their sources of funding, including donations made through electoral bonds.
• The ECI has been criticized for the accuracy of the electoral rolls, which has led to the disenfranchisement of many voters. One suggestion is to introduce a system of continuous updation of the electoral rolls, using technology such as Aadhaar to ensure that every eligible voter is registered.
• ECI must introduce more voter education programs, particularly in rural areas, to increase voter turnout and ensure that voters are aware of the electoral process.
• The ECI should work with civil society organizations, political parties, and other stakeholders to identify and implement reforms that can make the electoral process more transparent, fair, and inclusive.

Staffing and Financing of Election Commision:

• The Secretariat of the Commission has an independent budget, which is finalized directly in consultation between the Commission and the Finance Ministry of the Union Government. 
  • The latter generally accepts the recommendations of the Commission for its budgets. 
• The major expenditure on actual conduct of elections is, however, reflected in the budgets of the concerned constituent units of the Union – States and Union Territories. 
  • If elections are being held only for the Parliament, the expenditure is borne entirely by the Union Government while for the elections being held only for the State Legislature, the expenditure is borne entirely by the concerned State. 
  • In case of simultaneous elections to the Parliament and State Legislature, the expenditure is shared equally between the Union and the State Governments. 
• For Capital equipment, expenditure related to preparation for electoral rolls and the scheme for Electors’ Identity Cards too, the expenditure is shared equally. 
• Regarding the staffing and financing , the Supreme court left the policy decision to Parliament’s wisdom. However, it made a “fervent appeal” to the Union to create a permanent secretariat for the Election Commission of India.
• It also said that the commission’s expenditure must directly be charged to the Consolidated Fund of India to prevent the executive from hampering the independent functioning of the commission by cutting its financial resources.

Read all the previous Sansad TV Perspective articles in the link.

Sansad TV Perspective: Election Commission Reforms:- Download PDF Here