Table of Contents
THE CONTEXT: The undermining of democratic competition in Surat, where the BJP candidate was elected unopposed to the Lok Sabha after the Congress candidate’s nomination papers were invalidated due to alleged forged signatures. The BJP’s objective of creating a “Congress-less India” suggests that such an intent is authoritarian and that the events in Surat represent unfair electoral practices.
ISSUES:
- Elimination of Contest: There is a significant concern about the lack of electoral competition, particularly pointing out the unopposed election of the BJP candidate as a symptom of a broader malaise affecting Indian democracy. This situation arose due to the withdrawal of all other candidates and the rejection of the Congress candidate’s nomination over alleged discrepancies.
- Authoritarian Intentions: The BJP’s declared objective of creating a “Congress-less India” reflects an authoritarian intent, even if pursued through what might appear as legitimate electoral processes.
- Misuse of State Power and Electoral Malpractice: It is alleged that the unopposed election resulted from foul tactics, including the misuse of state power and electoral malpractice. This includes the claim that signatures on the nomination papers of the Congress candidate, Nilesh Kumbhani, and his dummy candidate were forged.
- Impact on Democracy: The lack of opposition and contestation of ideas is portrayed as detrimental to the health of India’s democracy. It is implied that such practices erode the democratic fabric by eliminating healthy political competition and debate.
- Need for Democratic Reforms: The BJP needs to foster a political culture where disagreements are resolved through fair and open contests, suggesting that this is essential for the sustainability of democratic governance in India.
THE WAY FORWARD:
- Enhanced Scrutiny and Transparency in Nomination Processes: To prevent forgery, nomination papers, and proposer signatures should be subject to stricter verification processes. This could involve cross-verification by independent bodies or technology to ensure authenticity.
- Legal and Regulatory Reforms: Strengthening the legal framework to impose severe penalties for electoral fraud and manipulation could deter such practices. Additionally, reforms could be introduced to make the electoral process more transparent and accountable.
- Role of the Election Commission: The Election Commission of India (ECI) needs to play a more proactive role in overseeing elections, ensuring that all candidates have a fair chance to contest. This includes rigorous monitoring of the election process and swift action against irregularities.
- Voter Education and Awareness: Educating voters about their rights and the importance of a competitive electoral process is crucial. Awareness campaigns can empower voters to demand greater accountability and transparency from candidates and political parties.
- Encouraging Political Pluralism: Policies to promote the participation of multiple political parties and independent candidates could help prevent the dominance of a single party. This might include financial support for smaller parties and fair access to media and public forums.
- Judicial Oversight and Intervention: The judiciary should have a clear mandate to intervene in electoral malpractice cases. This would ensure an additional layer of oversight and maintain the integrity of electoral outcomes.
THE CONCLUSION:
The case of Surat is a stark reminder of the challenges facing Indian democracy. Addressing these challenges requires a multifaceted approach involving legal reforms, active regulatory oversight, and enhanced public engagement in the electoral process. Only through concerted efforts can the spirit of actual democratic competition be preserved, ensuring that elections are a genuine reflection of the people’s will.
UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTION:
Q. Discuss the procedures for deciding disputes arising from the election of a Member of the Parliament or State Legislature under The Representation of the People Act, 1951. What are the grounds on which the election of any returned candidate may be declared void? What remedy is available to the aggrieved party against the decision? Refer to the case laws. 2022
MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:
Q. Examine the implications of a candidate’s unopposed election on the democratic process in India. Considering the recent events in Surat, discuss the measures that need to be taken to ensure the integrity of electoral contests and the role of the Election Commission in upholding democratic principles.
SOURCE:
Spread the Word