Mains Practice Questions

Introduction

The Election Commission of India (ECI) is a constitutional body responsible for conducting free and fair elections under Article 324 of the Indian Constitution. While constitutional and legal provisions provide safeguards, concerns remain regarding executive influence, financial dependence, and weak enforcement powers.

Body

Adequacy of Existing Provisions Ensuring the Independence of the Election Commission

• Constitutional Authority under Article 324: Article 324 grants the Election Commission (ECI) autonomy over the superintendence, direction, and control of elections to Parliament, state legislatures, and the offices of the President and Vice President.
  • However, it lacks institutional safeguards against executive influence. (E.g., executive’s greater role in appointments of Election Commissioners.)
• Security of Tenure for the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC): The CEC cannot be removed except through impeachment, similar to a Supreme Court judge, ensuring stability.
  • However, Election Commissioners (ECs) do not enjoy the same protection, as they can be removed by the President on the recommendation of the CEC, making them more vulnerable to government pressure.
• Financial Autonomy Provisions: ECI’s expenditures are charged to the Consolidated Fund of India, preventing abrupt financial cuts.
  • However, it still depends on the executive for budget approvals, limiting its operational independence. (E.g., Unlike CAG, ECI lacks direct financial control.)
• Judicial Safeguards and Precedents: Supreme Court rulings, such as T.N. Seshan v. Union of India (1995), upheld ECI’s independent authority in conducting elections.
  • The Anoop Baranwal case (2023) led to a directive for a collegium-based appointment process, though later overridden by the 2023 Act, restoring executive control.
• Powers to Conduct Free and Fair Elections: The ECI can enforce the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and regulate political parties.
  • However, MCC lacks statutory backing, making enforcement weak. (E.g., In 2019, hate speech violations by political leaders led only to warnings.)
• Legal Protection Against Judicial Interference (Article 329): Article 329 bars direct judicial intervention in electoral matters except through election petitions, preventing undue delays in the electoral process.
  • However, ambiguities remain, leading to conflicting interpretations by courts, sometimes delaying election-related decisions. (E.g., Delays in disqualification cases of legislators.)
• Institutional Structure and Bureaucratic Support: The ECI has a permanent bureaucratic setup at the central and state levels to conduct elections.
  • However, it relies on government personnel (IAS, IPS officers) during elections, raising concerns of administrative influence. (E.g., Allegations of partisan behavior by state election officials.)

Reforms to Strengthen the Election Commission’s Autonomy:

• Institutional Reforms for Appointment and Removal: Revise the 2023 Act to introduce a collegium system comprising the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India, and the Leader of the Opposition for the appointment of Election Commissioners.
  • There is a need to ensure that Election Commissioners (ECs) receive the same removal protections as the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) to uphold institutional independence and safeguard against arbitrary dismissals.
• Ensuring Financial Autonomy: Amend the financial provisions to charge the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) budget directly to the Consolidated Fund of India, similar to the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) and the Supreme Court, thereby guaranteeing financial independence and insulating the ECI from executive influence.
• Strengthening Legal Backing for the Model Code of Conduct (MCC): Model Code of Conduct (MCC) can be granted a statutory status, making its provisions legally enforceable and allowing for stricter penalties on violations.
  • Establish a dedicated Election Tribunal to facilitate swift adjudication of electoral disputes, ensuring timely and effective resolution of violations.
• Empowered Penal Authority: Amend the Representation of the People Act, 1951 to introduce specific provisions to penalize the deliberate spread of misinformation and deep fake content during elections.
  • Impose strict liability on political parties and candidates for disseminating fake news.

Conclusion

While the safeguards for ECI are significant but not fully adequate, further strengthening is needed to enhance its autonomy. Reforms like a collegium-based appointment process, financial independence, and legal backing for MCC can ensure greater transparency and fairness in elections and enhance institutional autonomy.