Election Commission of India: Autonomy, Appointments & Accountability

Context

The independence of the Election Commission of India has come under public scrutiny following allegations of irregularities in electoral roll revisions and discussions around initiating removal proceedings against the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC). These developments have revived debates on institutional autonomy, appointment procedures, and the credibility of India’s electoral process.

Q1. What is meant by the independence of the Election Commission and why is it important?

1. Independence of the Election Commission refers to its ability to:
   1. Perform electoral functions without political or executive influence.
   2. Exercise constitutional powers autonomously over voter registration, polling, counting, and declaration of results.
   3. Take decisions based solely on law and procedure, supported by security of tenure for its members, especially the CEC.
   4. The Commission must act as a neutral constitutional referee, not as an administrative arm of the government.
2. Importance
   1. Free and fair elections form part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution, as affirmed in Indira Gandhi vs. Raj Narain.
   2. Article 326 guarantees universal adult franchise, ensuring voting rights to every citizen above 18 years.
   3. Any perception of bias or manipulation weakens democratic legitimacy and erodes public trust.
   4. Recent allegations of voter list manipulation demonstrate how quickly confidence in democratic institutions can decline when electoral neutrality is questioned.

Q2. What is the constitutional status and composition of the Election Commission?

1. Article 324 establishes a permanent Election Commission over elections to Parliament, State Legislatures, and the offices of President and Vice-President with powers of superintendence, direction and control.
2. This constitutional design ensures:
   1. Institutional continuity
   2. Operational autonomy from routine executive interference
   3. Broad discretionary authority in election management
3. Composition
   1. The Commission consists of a Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners.
   2. Since 1993, it has operated as a multi-member body, a structure upheld by the Supreme Court in T.N. Seshan vs. Union of India.
   3. The CEC functions as Chairperson, while decisions are taken collectively, preventing concentration of power in a single office.

Q3. How are the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners appointed and what are the concerns associated with it?

1. The appointment framework changed with the enactment of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Office and Terms of Office) Act, 2023.
2. Present mechanism
   1. Appointments are formally made by the President.
   2. Names are recommended by a Selection Committee consisting of the Prime Minister, a Union Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition.
3. Concerns
   1. The Chief Justice of India is excluded from the Selection Committee.
   2. This departs from the interim arrangement directed by the Supreme Court in Anoop Baranwal vs. Union of India, which had required judicial participation until Parliament enacted a law.
   3. Critics argue that this increases executive dominance in appointments, potentially weakening institutional independence.
   4. The constitutional validity of the 2023 Act is currently under judicial consideration.

Q4. What safeguards exist to protect the Election Commission’s independence (difficult removal procedure)?

1. Removal of the Chief Election Commissioner
   1. Article 324(5) provides that the CEC can be removed only in the same manner and on the same grounds as a Supreme Court judge under Article 124(4) (Proved misbehaviour and Incapacity).
   2. Removal Procedure
      1. A motion must be signed by at least 100 Lok Sabha members or 50 Rajya Sabha members.
      2. The Speaker or Chairman may admit the motion.
      3. A three-member inquiry committee is formed, consisting of:
         1. A Supreme Court judge
         2. A Chief Justice of a High Court
         3. A distinguished jurist
      4. The CEC is given a full opportunity to defend themselves, ensuring natural justice.
      5. Both Houses of Parliament must pass the motion by special majority.
2. Removal of Other Election Commissioners
   1. Other Election Commissioners can be removed by the President on the recommendation of the CEC.
   2. The Supreme Court has clarified that such recommendations cannot be arbitrary.
3. These provisions aim to balance executive accountability with institutional autonomy.

Q5. What is the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), and why has it raised electoral concerns?

1. The current debate is linked to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
2. Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is a comprehensive updating exercise of electoral rolls conducted by the Election Commission of India.
3. It is different from routine annual revision because:
   1. It involves house-to-house verification of voters.
   2. It requires physical revalidation of voter details.
   3. It aims to remove duplicate entries, dead voters and shifted voters.
   4. It also adds newly eligible voters (18+ citizens).
4. Reported issues include:
   1. Large-scale deletion of voter names
   2. Alleged targeting of specific population groups
   3. Compressed and hurried verification processes
5. Since electoral rolls are the gateway to democratic participation, flaws in revision exercises threaten:
   1. Universal adult suffrage
   2. Equality in political representation
   3. Public confidence in election outcomes
6. Multiple challenges have reached the Supreme Court, highlighting tensions between administrative efficiency and constitutional guarantees.

Q6. What are the governance implications and emerging challenges?

1. Democratic and Administrative Implications
   1. Erosion of public trust in electoral institutions
   2. Questions over neutrality in voter registration processes
   3. Increased judicial intervention in electoral administration
   4. Potential centralisation of control over an institution meant to be independent
2. Core Challenges
   1. Ensuring transparent and inclusive electoral roll management
   2. Preserving independence in appointments
   3. Preventing executive dominance
   4. Balancing efficiency with constitutional rights

Conclusion

The independence of the Election Commission is central to India’s constitutional democracy. While Article 324 and strong removal safeguards provide structural protection, recent controversies over appointments and electoral roll revisions expose emerging vulnerabilities. Going forward, maintaining public trust will depend on transparent processes, robust judicial oversight, and a genuine commitment to free and fair elections—without which the promise of universal adult franchise risks being hollowed out.