THE CONTEXT: On May 22, the Election Commission of India (ECI) urged the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Congress to avoid raising divisive issues during their campaigns. This call comes amid criticisms that the ECI has been ineffective or biased in enforcing the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) during the ongoing Lok Sabha elections.
ISSUES:
- Effectiveness of the Election Commission of India (ECI): There are allegations that the ECI has not adequately enforced the MCC and has overlooked some violations. The effectiveness of the ECI in ensuring free and fair elections is questioned, with critics arguing that the ECI’s actions may not always be perceived as impartial or timely.
- Need for Legal Teeth for the MCC: There is a debate on whether the MCC should be legally enforceable. While some argue that giving it legal teeth would prolong judicial processes, others believe that limited legal powers, such as imposing monetary penalties or temporary disqualifications, could enhance its effectiveness.
- Powers of the ECI under Article 324: The ECI has significant powers under Article 324 of the Constitution to act without specific legal provisions. However, there is a discussion on whether the ECI fully utilizes these powers and whether these powers are sufficient to address all violations effectively.
- Impact of Judicial Proceedings on the Electoral Process: Concerns are raised that involving the judiciary in enforcing the MCC could delay the electoral process. Quick executive action by the ECI is preferred to ensure that elections are completed within the stipulated time frame.
- Regulation of social media: The influence of social media on election campaigns is highlighted, with a call for regulation to address issues such as hate speech and fake news. The complexity of regulating social media and the need for stakeholder discussions to find practical solutions are emphasized.
- Uniform Application of the MCC: The ECI needs to apply the MCC uniformly to all political leaders, regardless of their position. The perception that senior political leaders may not be held accountable for violations as strictly as others is a concern that needs to be addressed to ensure a level playing field.
THE WAY FORWARD:
- Statutory Backing for MCC: The Dinesh Goswami Committee (1990) suggested statutory backing for the MCC to make it enforceable through law. The Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law, and Justice (2013) proposed legally binding the MCC and integrating it into the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951.
- Enhanced Powers for the Election Commission: The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2001) recommended that the Election Commission should have the power to order fresh elections or void results in cases of serious violations. The Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2008) suggested empowering the Election Commission to take strong actions against electoral malpractices.
- Regulation of social media and Digital Campaigning: The need to regulate social media to control hate speech and fake news during elections is stressed. Healthy regulation of social media is suggested to prevent the spread of misinformation. United Kingdom Electoral Commission regulates digital campaigning, requiring transparency in online political advertisements and imposing fines for non-compliance.
- Strengthening the Monitoring Mechanism: The Election Commission of India (2004) proposed using electronic surveillance and other technologies to monitor elections and prevent malpractices. Law Commission Report on Reform of the Electoral Laws (1999) recommended the establishment of a robust monitoring mechanism to oversee the conduct of elections. Canada employs advanced monitoring systems and has a dedicated team to oversee compliance with electoral laws, ensuring transparency and accountability.
- Improving the Appointment Process of Election Commissioners: Justice Tarkunde Committee (1975) suggested a collegium system for appointing Election Commissioners to ensure their independence and impartiality. Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India (2015) raised the demand for a collegium system for the ECI involving the Chief Justice of India and the Leader of the Opposition.
THE CONCLUSION:
While the ECI possesses significant powers under Article 324 of the Constitution, the debate continues on whether the MCC should be given legal teeth to ensure more effective enforcement. Such a move’s complexities and potential drawbacks emphasize the need for quick executive action over prolonged judicial processes. It underscores the importance of reviewing and possibly updating the MCC to address modern challenges, including the regulation of social media.
UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTIONS:
Q.1 Discuss the role of the Election Commission of India, considering the evolution of the Model Code of Conduct. 2022
Q.2 Considering the recent controversy regarding the use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVM), what are the challenges before the Election Commission of India to ensure the trustworthiness of elections in India? 2018
MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:
Q.1 Discuss the Election Commission of India (ECI) role in ensuring free and fair elections. How effective has the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) been in this regard?
SOURCE:
Spread the Word