Our electoral processes are in a shambles. I am not talking about the functioning of the EVMs. I am talking about how elections are being conducted under the ostensible impartial gaze of the Election Commission.
The major flaw in the laws relating to elections is that though candidates are subject to a maximum ceiling of election expenses, no such ceiling applies to the costs of political parties. The result is that apart from candidates spending money beyond the maximum prescribed, which they do not naturally declare to the Election Commission, the political parties, especially those flush with funds, use their money power so that the electoral process becomes an uneven playing field. Those of us who, beyond our borders, tell the world that our democracy is thriving just because an election has taken place are indeed aware of how electoral victories are manipulated through sheer money power.
It would not be inaccurate to say that the industry, with high stakes in its enterprises and which seeks favours from the government, funds political parties in power through means, fair or foul. The electoral bond scheme, struck down by the Supreme Court, had enriched a political party in power at the Centre based on enormous donations from commercial players, perhaps due to a quid pro quo, emanating from favours doled out by the government. There are enough facts to suggest that it is indeed so.
The electoral bond scheme allowed for the funding of political parties through banking channels. Yet the display of expenditure by political parties during any election is obscene. There is no mechanism in the law to deal with this. As a result, the political party having access to maximum funding gets an undue advantage in the electoral process and its outcome.
But this is only the tip of the iceberg. On the ground, the manipulation of the electoral process is frightening. There are allegations that those electors and class of electors perceived to be against the political party in power are lured through unsavoury transactions, ensuring that either they do not venture to vote or are persuaded to vote by offering allurements difficult to resist. I am also told that in some instances, black indelible ink used at the polling station is administered and readily accepted by the electors for a price. This ensures that such a person, perceived as voting for the opposition, will not come to vote. No mechanism is available to prevent this unacceptable interference in the election process.
We are aware that thousands of voters’ names are added to the electoral rolls within six months of the election. These numbers are occasionally larger than those added to the electoral rolls in the last five years. It casts serious doubt on the veracity of these additions and calls for a serious investigation, which the Election Commission, being aware of the facts, is loath to do. That is not all. We have instances in the New Delhi assembly constituency, where elections were recently held, where names were added in establishments; those many additional people could not possibly have resided there, given the size of the accommodation. We are also aware that a political party member, who allegedly followed the rules and, through an application, ensured the deletion of eighteen thousand electors in that constituency. This is perhaps not an isolated example. Massive deletions of names from the electoral roll occur, especially concerning members of a particular religious community, which skews electoral outcomes. Again, no effective mechanism is available in law to stop such mass deletions.
Yet another more serious issue mocks the concept of free and fair elections, which the Election Commission is duty-bound to ensure. The Police administration is often used in certain specific constituencies to either pick up people overnight or ensure that certain electors or class of electors do not exercise their franchise. This allows for a drop in the percentage of votes polled in those constituencies. We saw that happening in Rampur some time ago, and we have seen that happening in almost every election held recently.
When the police machinery, which should ensure a level playing field, itself creates an uneven playing field and allows those in power to offer allurements both in cash and kind, then the rationale of a free and fair election becomes a farce. I am given to understand that in the bye-election of Milkipur in Uttar Pradesh, the 500 complaints to the Election Commission, alleging fake voting, rigging and intimidation, received no response.
This is apart from the blatantly biased functioning of the Election Commission in the recent past. In certain states, elections are staggered; in others, they are held simultaneously for no rational reason. The public perception is that such decisions tend to help the political party in power.
The discriminatory attitude of the Election Commission was further evident in the recent past, where the ruling party members were allowed to make statements in gross violation of the model code of conduct, with the Commission acting as a mute spectator. When the institutions themselves become partisan, the electoral outcomes are far removed from the will of the people.
The other aspect relates to how election disputes are allowed to take years to resolve because court processes are laggard. We are all aware that most of the election petitions linger for years, and some become infructuous or are decided long after the term of the assembly.
It is time for a structural change in the entire electoral process. Civil servants should never man the Election Commission in the light of our recent experiences. The process of selection should be revamped. The method of appointment of Election Commissioners should not be in the hands
of the ruling party but through an institutional framework which will ensure that the cherished dream of our forefathers for a free and fair poll being a basic structure of the Constitution is realised. At the moment, their dream is being shattered.
(Views are personal)
(Tweets @KapilSibal)
Kapil Sibal | Senior lawyer and member of Rajya Sabha