The opinion of the Supreme Court Judgement on the appointment of Election Commissioners may impact assembly elections and also Lok Sabha polls next year, opinionated personalities tell Mohd Naushad Khan
The Election Commissioner, Anup Chandra Pandey will retire on February 14, 2024 after reaching the age of 65. This will create a vacancy in the Election Commission early next year. The issue of appointment of Election Commissioners will once again come to the fore then. However, many believe that the opinion of SC Judgement on the appointment of Election Commissioners may impact assembly elections and also Lok Sabha polls next year.
On March 18, Law Minister Kiren Rijiju invoked the constitutional “Lakshman Rekha” that governs many institutions, including the government and the judiciary, and questioned who would carry out judicial work if judges were included in administrative appointments.
“The appointment of Election Commissioners is prescribed in the Constitution. Parliament has to enact a law. Accordingly, the appointment has to be done. I agree that there is no enactment for that in Parliament, there is a vacuum,” the minister said at the India Today Conclave.
Throughout his 23-year tenure as a judge, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud claimed on March 18 that no one has ever instructed him on how to determine a case. The remark was made in the midst of the ongoing Centre v. Supreme Court dispute over a number of issues, the latest of which was Union Minister Kiren Rijiju’s jab at retired judges, in which he had claimed that a small number of retired judges who are members of the anti-India gang are attempting to turn the Indian judiciary into the opposition.
The Chief Justice of India stated that the Collegium is the best system currently available for the appointment of judges in response to Rijiju’s outright rejection of the system.
“There is absolutely no pressure from the Executive,” CJI Chandrachud said. The CJI added, “The Election Commission judgment is one judgment. I can give you judgment after judgment that we deliver in a routine manner. They don’t make headlines as they are not big-ticket judgments. The largest litigant in India today is the State and most of our judgments deal with the involvement of the State and its instrumentalities.”
Earlier, in a historic judgement, the Supreme Court’s constitution bench issued its long-awaited decision regarding the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs). According to this order, the Chief Justice of India, the Prime Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha would form a committee to advise the President of India on the appointments.
SY Quraishi, former Chief Election Commissioner, during a special interview under face-to-face column with this scribe in March 2019, said, “We have more than 40 electoral reform proposals pending with the government for the last two or three decades. One reform we have been demanding is that people against whom serious or heinous criminal cases like rape, dacoity, murder, kidnapping and corruption are pending should be debarred from contesting elections before their conviction and even during their trial. We also want the appointment system of Commissioners to change.”
On the Collegium System, the former CEC said, “The Election Commission of India is the most powerful Commission in the world but our system is the most deficient. We are the only Commission in the world appointed by the government of the day without wider consultation. In most countries, there is a Collegium System where the Leader of Opposition is consulted. We have a Collegium System in India. The Judges, Central Vigilance Commissioner, Information Commissioner are all appointed through Collegium. Then why not Election Commissioners?
“In many countries, there are not only Collegium systems but full parliament hearings. In some countries, the interview of the candidate is live telecasted for people to judge. The trust of political parties and voters in the Election Commission is paramount, and hence collegium is the best way forward.”
According to Subhash C. Kashyap, former Secretary-General of 7th Lok Sabha, 8th Lok Sabha and 9th Lok Sabha and Lok Sabha Secretariat (Lower House of Parliament of India) from 1984 to 1990,and also a well-known political scientist, an expert in the Indian Constitution and Constitutional Law, “There is general crisis of character. Political culture has declined and constitutional culture even more. There is decline in constitutional political culture. Such problem arises due to crises in character and men are of the same frailties whether in judiciary, government, EC and parliament, men are subjected to same common frailties. As former supreme court judge has said, to believe that those in politics are evil and in judiciary are angels would be wrong.So simply changing procedure will not change unless and until the man who holds the top post is a man of character. Simply introducing collegium in election commission will not make any difference because people who will be selected are the same. One may ask that whether collegium system in judiciary and other institutions has made any difference.”
Senior Police officer Julio Ribeiro who has served asformer Commissioner of Mumbai Police from 1982 to 1986, Director General of Central Reserve Police Force, Director General Police of Gujarat and Punjab, in his article, “Appoint persons of integrity,” inThe Tribune India on March 17, has reasonably argued, “The Supreme Court’s solution to the problem of appointment of unbiased and truly independent Election Commissioners may not turn out to be the ideal or the ultimate solution. All institutions are as good or bad as the persons who man them. Finally, it depends on the individuals chosen to lead it. The Opposition leader at that moment of time may be one who is contemplating a change of loyalties. Even the CJI, in office when the committee of three meets, may not be without any bias! But the option chosen by the Constitution Bench appears to be the best that can be thought of in the prevailing circumstances.”
Dr Narender Nagarwal, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, stated: “The Supreme Court’s historic decision is considered to have a critical effect on maintaining the Election Commission’s independence and autonomy. The EC has taken a lot of heat over the years for its functioning due to its prejudiced and selective approaches. A three-member team made up of the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India would henceforth be responsible for selecting the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners, according to the latest SC verdict.
“The judgment added that, in the event that there was no Leader of Opposition, as there currently is, the person serving alongside the PM and the CJI would be the Head of the Opposition party with the largest presence in the Lok Sabha. The NDA Government is in an awkward position as a result of the recent Supreme Court rulings, notably the one on the Adani controversy, as the Opposition may now claim marginal triumphs. The rulings are significant since they arrive before a number of state elections this year and the Lok Sabha election 2024.”