T.N. Seshan, the former Chief Election Commissioner of India, contrasts his legacy with that of subsequent Election Commissioners, suggesting a decline in the sanctity of Indian elections after his tenure. It is truly said that toothless tiger ESC is back – Rajiv Kumar transformed it into a domestic cat. Seshan’s impact on the Election Commission was profound; he was known for rigorously enforcing election laws, transforming the institution into a symbol of democratic integrity. Since his time, however, there have been instances and allegations that have led critics to believe that the Election Commission’s effectiveness and neutrality have eroded. It can well be said that Toothless tiger ECI is back – Rajiv Kumar transformed it into a domestic cat.
Seshan was appointed as Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) in 199. He inherited an Election Commission (EC) that, in practice, was often criticized as a “toothless tiger.” Indian elections were plagued by widespread irregularities, including booth capturing, vote-buying, misuse of government machinery, and political violence. Seshan recognized that to preserve democracy, the Election Commission had to enforce the Model Code of Conduct, an ethical guideline meant to prevent abuse of power by political parties.
Seshan banned posters, loudspeakers, and rallies without permission. His strict enforcement created a more level playing field, especially for candidates without substantial financial resources. He introduced voter identification cards, curbing booth capturing and bogus voting. His efforts led to greater transparency and a sense of voter empowerment.
He mandated that political parties disclose election expenses, although the subsequent dilution of these rules is often cited as a factor in today’s campaign finance issues. Seshan ensured the Election Commission’s independence by refusing political pressures, which led to several clashes with powerful politicians.
Seshan’s term underscored that an assertive Election Commission could uphold electoral integrity. His confrontational style and commitment to enforcing the rules brought the EC into the national spotlight as a powerful body capable of challenging even the ruling class.
Post Seshan period – Shifts in the Election Commission’s Role and Image
Seshan’s successors faced the challenge of balancing assertiveness with impartiality while negotiating political pressures. Despite the foundation he laid, several incidents and trends emerged that made observers question whether the Election Commission continued in Seshan’s footsteps or veered away from his legacy.
Multi-Member Election Commission Structure
In 1993, during Seshan’s tenure, the government expanded the EC to a three-member body. While this change was ostensibly intended to bring broader perspectives, critics saw it as an attempt to dilute Seshan’s authority. The multi-member structure continued after Seshan, and at times, conflicts between commissioners emerged, sometimes paralyzing decision-making.
Rise of Allegations of Partisanship
In the post-Seshan era, Election Commissioners occasionally faced accusations of partisanship. Controversy arose when certain opposition parties accused the EC of favouring the ruling coalition. EC faced intense scrutiny over alleged bias. During the election campaign, the Commission was criticized for taking a lenient stance on complaints against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah. Several opposition leaders questioned why the EC appeared hesitant to penalize high-profile leaders for potential violations of the Model Code of Conduct, thereby raising concerns over impartiality.
In contrast to Seshan’s proactive approach, post-Seshan Election Commissioners were sometimes perceived as reactive rather than proactive. In the 2019 elections, cases of hate speech by politicians went unpunished. It resulted in questioning EC’s efficacy in maintaining campaign decorum.
Political analysts have noted that penalties on lesser-known candidates for minor infringements often appeared harsher than the consequences for major political figures accused of more severe violations. This inconsistency led to doubts about whether the EC was selectively enforcing its powers.
Political Influence and the Appointment Process
The independence of the Election Commission rests significantly on the integrity of its appointment process. However Election Commissioners are appointed directly by the government, a practice that critics argue makes the EC vulnerable to political influence:
Ashok Lavasa known for dissenting on several rulings favouring the ruling government, resigned in 2020, allegedly due to pressure and harassment. His resignation was seen as a sign of growing partisanship reflecting a perceived drift from Seshan’s values of integrity and independence.
Ashok Lavasa, the former Election Commissioner of India, faced significant challenges during his tenure. He was known for his dissenting opinions, particularly during the 2019 general elections when he disagreed with the clean chits given to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah for alleged violations of the Model Code of Conduct. This led to investigations against his family members by the Income Tax Department, which many viewed as retaliation for his dissent. Lavasa eventually resigned in August 2020 and joined the Asian Development Bank.
Arun Goel resigned as Election Commissioner just before the announcement of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. Officially, he cited personal reasons for his resignation. However, there were reports of disagreements with Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar over various issues, including the composition and size of Election Commission teams and the formats of press briefings. This sudden resignation, along with the existing vacancy in the Election Commission, has raised concerns about the independence and functioning of the institution
Goel’s resignation, along with Lavasa’s earlier departure, has led to concerns about the, Arun Goel resigned as Election Commissioner just before the announcement of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. Officially, he cited personal reasons for his resignation.
Technological Advances and EVM Controversies
Seshan had emphasized manual voting due to the risks associated with digital manipulation. In the post-Seshan era, Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) were introduced, followed later by Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machines. Although EVMs significantly reduced instances of booth capturing, they introduced new allegations concerning tampering and hacking.
Concerns about EVM reliability were voiced for the first time. Several opposition leaders demanded a return to paper ballots, alleging that the machines could be tampered with, though no definitive proof of widespread tampering was found.
VVPAT machines were added to address transparency concerns, but opposition parties argued that the EC did not sufficiently audit VVPAT slips, which fuelled scepticism. The refusal to count a significant sample of VVPAT slips against the EVM results during this election led many to question the EC’s commitment to transparency.
Declining Public Perception and Calls for Reform
Since Seshan, the EC’s image as an incorruptible institution has faced periodic crises, leading to suggestions for reform. Many propose that a multi-member panel, rather than the ruling government, should select Election Commissioners. Such a reform would, theoretically, protect the EC from undue political influence.
To address gaps in the EC’s authority, experts have called for clearer legal provisions empowering the EC to take swift action without awaiting judicial orders, thus preventing lengthy delays that could undermine the electoral process.
Toothless tiger ECI is back – Rajiv Kumar transformed it into a domestic cat – A Gradual Erosion or Contextual Challenges?
T.N. Seshan’s tenure left an indelible mark on Indian democracy, exemplifying how a strong-willed Election Commissioner can uphold the electoral process with unwavering integrity. The years following Seshan saw technological shifts, changes in the political landscape, and allegations of partiality within the Election Commission. The Commission’s increasing dependency on political goodwill for appointments has raised concerns that it could potentially be swayed by ruling governments.
While not every Election Commissioner has exhibited bias or negligence, the institution’s image has undeniably evolved, with some instances casting a shadow on its impartiality. The ongoing debate around the Election Commission’s autonomy underscores the need for reforms to protect it from external influences, ensuring that T.N. Seshan’s legacy of impartial, transparent, and fearless administration remains a standard for future Election Commissioners to aspire to.
T.N. Seshan’s legacy is a benchmark for the Election Commission. Protecting the sanctity of elections will require future Election Commissioners to combine his decisiveness with modern safeguards, ensuring the EC remains above political pressures, an unbiased guardian of Indian democracy.
Concerns of the Opposition
Opposition parties have demanded greater transparency in the ECI’s decision-making processes and accountability for its actions.
The opposition has criticized the ECI for dismissing their complaints as “baseless” and “frivolous,” arguing that their concerns are not being taken seriously. The opposition has called for measures to ensure the ECI’s independence from political influence, including reforms in the appointment process of Election Commissioners.
The integrity of democratic institutions is crucial for maintaining public trust and ensuring fair governance. When the electorate feels sidelined and the judiciary appears indifferent, it can indeed
It’s important for citizens to stay informed, engage in constructive dialogue, and advocate for reforms that strengthen democratic processes. Your concerns reflect a broader need for vigilance and active participation in safeguarding democracy.
Government interference should be put on hold. Government should abstain from appointing ECI and appointments should be referred to a collegium. Establishing a collegium system for appointing Election Commissioners could enhance the independence and credibility of the Election Commission of India. This approach could help ensure that appointments are made based on merit and integrity, rather than political considerations.
It could also restore public trust in the electoral process and reinforce the ECI’s role as a neutral and impartial body. Implementing such a system would require significant legislative and constitutional changes, but it could be a crucial step towards strengthening democracy in India. What other reforms do you think could help improve the electoral process
Toothless tiger ECI is back – Rajiv Kumar transformed it into a domestic cat – Poor response or no response from the Election Commission
However, there were reports of disagreements with Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar over various issues, including the composition and size of Election Commission teams and the formats of press briefings. This sudden resignation, along with the existing vacancy in the Election Commission, has raised concerns about the independence and functioning of the institution and its independence and integrity of the ECI.
The ECI has also faced criticism for its handling of electronic voting machines (EVMs) and allegations of irregularities. In the recent Haryana state elections, the Congress party raised concerns about the functioning of EVMs, which the ECI dismissed as base-less. The ECI’s response highlighted the ongoing tension between the commission and political parties.
Apprehensions on the use of Form 17-C
Several concerns have been raised in recent years about the sincere use of Form 17-C, which directly impacts the transparency and trustworthiness of elections. There have been instances reported where the total number of votes recorded in Form 17-C did not match the actual number of votes cast as displayed by the EVMs during counting. Such discrepancies create suspicion about whether votes are being tampered with or manipulated in favour of certain candidates or parties.
While Form 17-C is a public document, it is not always made readily available to political parties, observers, or the public. Delays in providing access to Form 17-C can raise suspicions that vote totals may have been altered or manipulated during transit or handling. There have been concerns that in some cases, Form 17-C has not been properly filled out or has missing information, leading to doubts about the sanctity of the voting process at certain booths. Even though the form is filled out by polling officers, there have been instances where the lack of strict oversight has led to concerns that some polling officers may not be diligent in accurately recording the vote totals or that external pressures could lead to intentional errors.
Voting Percentage is not declared immediately.
In India, voting percentages are typically declared several hours or even days after polling concludes, sparking questions about the delay. Here are the main reasons for this delay and the apprehensions tied to it. India’s elections are massive undertakings, with millions of voters casting ballots in varied terrains and different weather conditions. It takes time for data from remote and rural polling stations to reach the central Election Commission offices.
Additionally, the ECI often conducts elections in phases, and it may delay announcing voting percentages to avoid influencing voters in subsequent phases of polling. Each polling booth reports its voter turnout separately, and this data needs to be consolidated at the constituency level before official voting percentages can be declared. This process can take time, especially in constituencies with many polling stations.
Critics argue that the delay in announcing voting percentages could be a strategy to benefit the ruling party. By withholding this information, there is a potential for manipulating public perception, especially during multi-phase elections. If voter turnout data is released immediately, it could influence campaign strategies, allowing parties to mobilize or demobilize their voters in later phases. In some cases, delays are caused by technical issues, such as communication difficulties from remote polling booths or issues with electronic data transmission. However, the lack of prompt reporting fuels suspicion that these delays are being used as an opportunity to manipulate voting data.
Manipulate Voting Patterns
Many critics and opposition parties argue that the delay in declaring voting percentages creates a significant gap in the transparency of the election process, which could be exploited. In multi-phase elections, the delay in reporting turnout data or voting patterns may benefit the ruling party, which has more resources and a better ability to quickly adjust its campaign strategy. The ruling party may use this lag to analyse voting behaviour in the first phase, allowing it to shift its focus or mobilize supporters more effectively in subsequent phases.
The delay can also lead to apprehensions about tampering with EVMs or discrepancies between recorded data and actual votes. For example, if the voting percentage is delayed, there could be concerns that EVMs are being manipulated to adjust vote totals to benefit the ruling party after polling concludes.
In some constituencies, sudden spikes or drops in voter turnout have been observed, often in favour of the ruling party. Without timely access to accurate voting percentage data, it becomes difficult for opposition parties to cross-check these turnouts, fuelling concerns about manipulation. The lack of immediate transparency in reporting voter turnout data erodes public trust in the electoral process. It fuels speculation that behind-the-scenes manipulations are taking place, especially in a politically charged atmosphere where accusations of bias against the ECI are already widespread.
Postal ballots.
Since government employees and security personnel often vote via postal ballots, it is alleged that there is indirect pressure on them to vote for the ruling party. Critics argue that in certain regions, local authorities aligned with the ruling party might influence these employees or attempt to monitor their votes, violating the principle of secrecy.
Senior citizens and other vulnerable groups who opt for postal voting may be targeted with undue influence by political parties, particularly in rural areas, where vote monitoring is more challenging. Critics have pointed out inefficiencies in the postal ballot delivery system, which could cause certain ballots to be delivered late, and thus disqualified. If ballots don’t reach the Election Commission in time, they are discarded, which has led to accusations that such delays might benefit the ruling party.
Toothless tiger ECI is back – Rajiv Kumar transformed it into a domestic cat – The Summation
Absolutely, legislative reforms could be a game-changer. Parliament stepping in to ensure the independence and transparency of the Election Commission would be a significant move towards strengthening democracy. Establishing a collegium system for appointments, enhancing transparency in decision-making, and ensuring accountability could restore public trust and reinforce the integrity of the electoral process.
It’s crucial for democratic institutions to function without undue influence, and legislative action could pave the way for a more robust and fair electoral system. What other areas do you think need reform to safeguard democracy in India?
The ECI has been accused of favouring the ruling party, particularly during the 2019 general elections. Opposition parties have claimed that the ECI’s decisions often benefit the ruling party, undermining its neutrality. There have been persistent allegations of EVM tampering and malfunctioning.
Despite the ECI’s assurances and court rulings affirming the reliability of EVMs, opposition parties remain sceptical. The ECI has been criticized for its handling of MCC violations, with accusations that it has been lenient towards the ruling party while being strict with the opposition. The resignation of Election Commissioners like Ashok Lavasa and Arun Goel has raised questions about the internal functioning and independence of the ECI.
The Election Commission gets further teeth
A notification has been issued by the Law Ministry, Government of India with regard to election conduct rules. According to the notification the Election Commission need not give any information sought by the public or any other affected party. Look at the video for further information: