THE ELECTORAL REFORMS IN CONTEMPORARY INDIA

THE ELECTORAL REFORMS IN CONTEMPORARY INDIA ARE A BIG DEAL IN THE WORLD. India is the largest and one of the most vibrant democracies in the world. It is true that we have been able to run a democratic system for more than 6 decades and we should be proud of it because very few developing nations have actually been able to run a democratic system.

But in recent years, unfortunately, there has been a growing feeling that the Indian Political System was not working very well. The entry of criminal elements in politics, defections of legislators, communalization of politics, minuses of public office by persons in high positions, and money power in elections have made it clear that there are deep-seated problems in many sectors of the Indian Parliamentary System. How and where did we fail? Does the fault lie with the constitution itself or its implementation? A very suitable answer is that it is mainly the political and electoral system, which has completely derailed the social, economic, and administrative fabric of the country.

 Now the time has come to consider whether we were wrong in adopting the present system of parliamentary democracy. Therefore, the only way to remedy the present malady is to make the political system deliver the goods. And it is not only the politicians who are to blame but also we are all responsible for the present state of affairs.

 ELECTION: 

An election is a formal decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual to hold public office. Elections have been the usual mechanism by which modern representative democracy has operated since the 17th century. Elections may fill offices in the legislature, sometimes in the executive and judiciary, and for regional and local government. This process is also used in many other private and business organizations, from clubs to voluntary associations and corporations.

The universal use of elections as a tool for selecting representatives in modern democracies is in contrast with the practice in the democratic archetype, of ancient Athens. As the Elections were considered an oligarchic institution and most political offices were filled using sortition, also known as allotment, by which officeholders were chosen by lot.

Electoral reform describes the process of introducing fair electoral systems where they are not in place or improving the fairness or effectiveness of existing systems. Psychology is the study of results and other statistics relating to elections (especially with a view to predicting future results).

ELECTORAL SYSTEM:

Electoral systems are detailed constitutional arrangements and voting systems that convert the vote into a political decision. The first step is to tally the votes, for which various vote-counting systems and ballot types are used. Voting systems then determine the result on the basis of the tally. Most systems can be categorized as either proportional or majoritarian. Among the former are party-list proportional representation and an additional member system. Among the latter are First Past the Post (FPP) (relative majority) and absolute majority. Many countries have growing electoral reform movements, which advocate systems such as approval voting, single transferable vote, instant runoff voting, or a Condorcet method; these methods are also gaining popularity for lesser elections in some countries more important elections still use more traditional counting methods.

While openness and accountability are usually considered cornerstones of a democratic system, the act of casting a vote and the content of a voter's ballot are usually important exceptions. The secret ballot is a relatively modern development, but it is now considered crucial in most free and fair elections, as it limits the effectiveness of intimidation.

PROBLEM OF CORRUPT PRACTICES IN ELECTION:

Corruption in Indian elections has always been a key issue. As corruption is also closely linked to crime and underworld activities, many laws have been promulgated and stringent rules instituted by the Election Commission. 

However, with corruption largely being a moral issue at its roots, law enforcement agencies have always found it hard to root out corruption through either enforcement or preventive surveillance.

Now that the dates for Indian elections have finally been announced, the Election Commission and its representatives countrywide are keeping a watchful eye on the activities of parties and their candidates. The idea is to prevent unethical practices like bribery, intimidation, and also a misuse of office and power.

According to a veteran political analyst and former editor of The Statesman, Pran Chopra, India's political system has been greatly vitiated by communalization and criminalization. Sickness of corruption and the influence of money and muscle power along with the use of religion in there in our electoral process.

He said that in many places, the degeneration of the electoral system as a result of illegal and immoral practices is being used for winning the election. He also pointed out that the outgoing Parliament had only 332 sittings as compared with the previous 356, and had wasted a total of 423 hours-24 percent of its time — on disruptions and adjournments due to disorderly scenes.

He also added that if immediate corrective measures are not taken proactively by all concerned, the future of democracy will face a serious problem. One should never forget that democracy is not all about periodic elections and political rights alone.

ELECTION REFORMS :

             The  Constitution of India provides sufficient and efficient provisions to control elections under Part XV- Election and Articles 324 to 329. Article 324 speaks- Superintendence, direction, and control of elections to be vested in the Election Commission. It means the Election Commission has the power to Superintendence, direct, and control the election through its enactments and legislation.

 Article 327 has a provision- The power of Parliament to make provisions with respect to elections to legislature. It speaks- Subject to the provisions of the constitution, parliament may from time by Law make provisions with respect to all matters relating to, or in connection with the election to either house of parliament or to the house of either house of the legislature of a state including the preparation of electorate rolls, the delimitation of constituencies and all other matters necessary for securing the due constitution of such house or houses. This provision indicates that any Court- High Courts and Apex Court has no constitutional provision’s right to interfere with the Election Legislation. The Parliament is the Supreme authority to deal with and legislate the election legislation. 

 Again in Article 329, Bar to interference by Courts in electoral matters. This Article speaks – Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution-

(a)    The validity of any law relating to the delimitation of Constituencies or the allotment of seats of such Constituencies made or purporting to be made under Article 327 0r Article 328, shall not be called into question in any Court.

(b)    No election to either house of Parliament or to the house of either house of the legislature of a state shall be called into question except by an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as may be provided for by or under any law made by the appropriate legislature.

Here, it is the parliament to enact legislation to control all types of loopholes with regard to a fair election. It is its utmost duty to hold elections in a fair manner and in a better way.

CONSULTATIONS ON ELECTORAL REFORMS:

India is known to have the largest democracy in the world. However, there is a need to strengthen this democracy which can happen only with some reforms in our electoral system. There has been an urgent need for electoral reforms and demand for this need has been made by many government committees and civil society organizations.  Hence, the initiative taken up by the Ministry of Law and Justice along with the Election Commission of India is appreciated and it surely is a step forward to accomplishing this endeavor.

Also, put together below are various government committees in the past that have taken up the issue of electoral reforms. The reports prepared by these committees and recommendations made by them have been put together in the background paper mentioned above.  

1.      The Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2008)

2.      Election Commission of India – Proposed Electoral Reforms (2004) 

3.      National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2001)

4.       Law Commission Report on Reform of the Electoral Laws (1999)

5.       Vohra Committee Report (1993) 

6.      Indrajit Gupta Committee on State Funding of Elections (1998) 

7.       Goswami Committee on Electoral Reforms (1990) 

 ADR and NEW have prepared a document containing recommendations for electoral and political reforms. To download Law Commission's draft for amendments to the Representation of People Act, titled 'Organization of Political Parties and matters incidental thereto'.

 To download the Draft of Political Parties (Registration and Regulation of Affairs, etc.) Act, 2011, prepared by a committee headed by Justice M.N. Venkatachalaih, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, and the Chairman of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, 2001. To download 

THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1988:    

      

The purpose of this amendment is to deal with electoral malpractices and for ensuring a free and fair poll. This 16-cause Act which amended the Representation of the People Acts, 1950 and1951, among other things, sought to facilitate polling by permitting the use of electronic voting machines. It also provided for the registration of political parties and penal provision to deal with booth-capturing and rigging. The main provisions of this Amendment were recommended by a committee headed by Mr. V. N. Gandil. Some of the important provisions of the Act are:

1.      The amended Act envisages the introduction of an electronic voting machine in 150 sensitive constituencies in the country. In the second phase, the machines would be introduced throughout the country.

2.       For the first time, it provides the definition of a political party and laid down the procedure for its compulsory registration and the allotment of symbols for each political party.

3.      The political parties are now required to include specific provisions in the memorandum or rules or regulations governing their function that they will fully abide by the principles enshrined in the Preamble to the constitution.

4.       One of the striking features of the Amendment is the deterrent punishment for booth capturing. Under the Amendment, booth capturing has been made a cognizable offense for the first time. Such an act would be punishable with a minimum imprisonment of six months and a maximum of two years, accompanied by a fine. Punishment will be higher in case a Government servant resorts to booth capturing.

5.       Another welcome addition is the disqualification of a number of categories of offenders from contesting the election. These will include persons convicted of offenses against women, such as rape, dowry excesses, and Sati. Apart from this, FERA violators, smugglers, or those committing terrorist acts would be debarred from electoral contests.

6.       The amendment has brought the designated officers of the State Governments under the control, supervision, superintendence, and discipline of the Election Commission while discharging their functions in the election.

7.       To prevent frivolous candidates from contesting elections, the number of proposers has been increased to 10 percent of the total electorate or 10 proposers, whichever is less.

8.       The amendment seeks to provide for deterrent punishment for disturbing election meetings with imprisonment ranging from six months to three years and enhanced fines.

But the Election Commission was not happy with this reform because some of its vital recommendations, such as those relating to organizational elections within a political party and money power, have been ignored. The government had also overlooked the commission’s recommendations on state funding on the plea that the state does not have sufficient funds and this would not, in any case, debar candidates from taking money from industrialists.

DINESH GOSWAMI COMMITTEE ON ELECTORAL REFORMS:

                                                                                                             The National Front, in its election manifesto, had promised extensive, electoral reforms. As per that promise, an Electoral Law Reform Committee was constituted in February 1990, under the Chairmanship of the then Union Law Minister (Late) Mr. Dinesh Goswami, to recommend a broad spectrum of electoral reforms.

ELECTORAL REFORMS BILL (MAY 30, 1990):

                                                                                        

                     In consequence of the recommendations of the above Committee, the National Front Government introduced three electoral reform bills in Parliament on May 30, 1990. Two of these bills sought to amend the constitution and one to amend the Representation of the People Acts of 1950 and 1951, with a view to introducing the reforms. The main features of the bill that sought to amend the representation of the people Acts, 1950 and 1951 are:

1.      State funding of expenses on fuel for campaign vehicles and other miscellaneous things, a bar on contesting from more than one constituency, and countermanding of the election, only on the death of a candidate fielded by a recognized political party.

2.      As proposed in the bills, the state funding was to be confined to the supply of copies of the electoral rolls, diesel or petrol for vehicles, and the hiring of microphones for election meetings.

3.       The new provision also tried to empower the Election Commission to nominate observers to watch the conduct of the election. The observers will have the power to direct the returning officers to stop the counting of votes or not to declare the result in certain contingencies like booth capturing. It also proposed to confer similar powers on the regional commissioners or supervisory officers of the Election Commission.

LAW PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS ON ELECTORAL REFORMS:

           The Law commission headed by former Supreme Court judge, Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy had made some important recommendations to the Union Government of Electoral Reforms in its report submitted on September 1999. It was intended to make the election and electoral system more fair and effective so that the nerves of democracy in India are strengthened.

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.      Independent candidates should be barred from contesting elections to the Lok Sabha and legislative assemblies.

2.       The legislature should have a full 5-year term.

3.       Inclusion of a chapter in the Representation of the People Act, to regulate the formation and functioning of political parties to avoid their splintering and to ensure internal democracy and maintenance of funds.

4.       Scrapping of explanation-1 to section 77(1) of the representation, people act to make the electoral system more representative, fair, and transparent. Section 77 exempts a candidate from declaring poll expenses incurred by him beyond the fixed limit. The Supreme Court has already declared that “section 77 is breeding corruption” and has recommended its scrapping.

5.      Suggested provision to make it obligatory for every candidate to declare his\her assets and of his\her spouse and dependent relations as well as provide particulars regarding criminal cases pending against them.

6.       On state funding of political parties, it has reiterated the recommendation of the Indrajit Gupta Committee subject to certain changes.

7.       In case of electoral offenses and certain other serious offenses, framing of a charge by the court should itself be a ground for disqualification, in addition to conviction.  

8.      Proposed amendments to the relevant provision of the criminal procedure code to check false complaints.

9.       Emphasized the desirability of adopting a rule that only a candidate obtaining more than 50% votes is declared elected and holding ‘run-off’ elections, wherever necessary.

10.   Any party, which receives less than 5% of the total votes in the election to the Lok Sabha and Assemblies shall not be entitled to any seat.

11.   A new rule suggested in the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business for Lok Sabha to ensure the stability of the Government.

12.  . Emphasized the desirability of adopting a rule that only a candidate obtaining more than 50% votes is declared elected and holding ‘run-off’ elections, wherever necessary.

13.   Any party, which receives less than 5% of the total votes in the election to the Lok Sabha and Assemblies shall not be entitled to any seat.

14.   A new rule suggested in the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business for Lok Sabha to ensure the stability of Government. “negative vote”

LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS ON ELECTION LAW:

In a recent Presidential reference 2002, the Supreme Court observed “Under Article 324, it is the duty and responsibilities of the Election Commission to hold a free and fair election at the earliest (it means ‘in time’)”. The Court further observed that “it would be the duty and responsibility of all concerned to render all  assistance and cooperation to the Election Commission for holding a free and fair election.”

 In another case Venkatachalam V/S Swaminathan, in Cases Under Article 191 (Disqualification of membership) and Art. 192 (Decision on questions as to disqualifications of members ), in such cases the High Court can interfere under Article 226 and entitle the Case.

SUGGESTIONS (REMEDIES TO CHECK ‘ELECTION EVILS’) :

There are so many evils in the election, which can be solved in the better interests of democracy in the country. Following are Suggestions to remove these evils.

1. Speedy Trial- Those candidates, whose criminal cases are pending in the courts should be disposed of speedy by the courts. In this reference ‘special courts’ can be established by the Government. The government should take the initiative to introduce a drastic and radical bill to effect this suggestion.

2.      People’s Awareness- People should be very vigilant and aware to check ‘Muscle power’ and ‘criminal’s power’ to interfere in the election. People can collectively take the decision to ‘ignore’ these elements. Not to vote for them.

3.      ‘Vigilant Media’- Media is active enough to check the above evils but the media should be more vigilant for a fair election.

   

CONCLUSION:

                            In India, the election has not become so easy and smooth. Corrupt practices have taken place in the election. ‘Criminals entry’ has become a regular practice. It should be checked in a proper and in an effective manner. It is not so easy task. Sincere efforts are required by all sides, especially the ‘political parties’ should be neat and clean in this matter. 

A  consensus should be developed in the political field that all types of reforms in the election are the utmost need of the time. This is necessary to protect democracy in the country.

                                                                      India is a strong but poor country. A good percentage of people are living below the poverty line.  They are not well-versed in education. Hence, they easily become victims of ill-designed elements of politics.

 Election Reforms are not so easy in our country due to many-many reasons. But some drastic and sincere efforts are essential to irradiate the evils. Following steps can be taken to remove the ‘evils of election’

1.  Political parties should be taken to distribute election Tickets to a worthy person.

2.  They should develop a ‘consensus’ on the fairness of the election.

3. From Time to time they should meet and develop fairness in this regard.

4. comprehensive Legislation should be passed by the parliament to check all types of evils of the election.

5.   Media must be vigilant to check evils in this field.

RAED IN HINDI CLICK HERRE

 BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1.      NATIONAL SEMINAR ON ELECTORAL

2.      Author: Shripad Kulkarni, Assistant Professor, Dept. of Political Science, University College of Arts, Tumkur.

3.      Indian Constitutional Law: New Challenges, Written by  ShyamLal Varma, India Publishing Company, Rampurwala Building, Indore-452007

4.      A Handbook of Electoral System Design from International IDEA

5.      Electoral Design Reference Materials from the ACE Project

6.      Electoral Reform - from the ACE Project

7.      The Scope of Electoral Reform - from the ACE Project

8.      Recent electoral reforms - from the ACE Project

9.      Electoral Reform in Mexico (1998) - from the ACE Project

10.  Combatting Corruption through Electoral Reform in Thailand - from the ACE Project

11.  AEI-Brookings Election Reform

12.  Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project

13.  Fair Vote Canada

14.  Paul McKeever's Testimony to the Select Committee on Electoral Reform: No electoral system is more "democratic" than any other

15.  Electoral Reform Wiki

16.  Electoral Reform Society (UK)

17.  Electoral Reform Canada

18.  Electoral Reform, an external wiki

19.  Voting Reform Canada

20.  Guide to different types of Electoral Reform

21.  Electoral reform - A vote of principle. The Guardian. 2010-07-03

22.  Arrow, Kenneth J. 1963. Social Choice and Individual Values. 2nd ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

23.  Benoit, Jean-Pierre and Lewis A. Kornhauser. 1994. "Social Choice in a Representative Democracy." American Political Science Review 88.1: 185-192.

24.  Corrado Maria, Daclon. 2004. US elections and war on terrorism – Interview with professor Massimo Teodori Analisi Difesa, n. 50

25.  Farquharson, Robin. 1969. A Theory of Voting. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

26.  Mueller, Dennis C. 1996. Constitutional Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

27.  Owen, Bernard, 2002. "Le système électoral et son effet sur la représentation parlementaire des partis: le cas européen.", LGDJ;

28.  Riker, William. 1980. Liberalism Against Populism: A Confrontation Between the Theory of Democracy and the Theory of Social Choice. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

29.  Thompson, Dennis F. 2004. Just Elections: Creating a Fair Electoral Process in the U.S. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN: 978-0226797649

30.  Ware, Alan. 1987. Citizens, Parties, and the State. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

।।जय हिन्द जय भारत।।



SAVE WATER SAVE LIFE