M A I N   N E W S

EC dumps Jaya’s charge
Justifies acceptance of Pillai’s papers
Tribune News Service

New Delhi, April 30
The Election Commission today justified the acceptance of the nomination of former Kerala Minister R Balakrishna Pillai in Kerala. Mr Pillai has been convicted for five years in a corruption case. The Election Commission said the provisions of the Representation of People Act, 1951, were clear on the issue.

“Section 8 (4) of the Representation of People Act (RPA) makes it clear that conviction against an MP or an MLA gets postponed by three months from the date of the trial court order and once he files an appeal the disqualification does not come into effect at all till disposal of his appeal,” the Chief Election Commissioner, Dr M.S. Gill, told newspersons here.

He was replying to a question on the controversy that had erupted over acceptance of Mr Pillai’s nomination in Kerala for the May 10 assembly poll when AIADMK chief Jayalalitha’s nomination has been rejected in four constituencies in Tamil Nadu.

This was the first official reaction from the Election Commission after Ms Jayalalitha raised this issue in the media and charged that she was “victim of injustice”.

Dr Gill clarified that while Section 8 (4) was applicable in the case of Mr Pillai, being a sitting MLA, the nomination of Ms Jayalalitha was rejected under Section 8 (3) of the RPA, 1951.

Moreover, he pointed out that the decision of the Kottarakara returning officer was upheld by a Bench of the Madras High Court on April 20 and, April 23.

Regarding another petition moved in the Kerala High Court on the same issue, the CEC said the commission would promptly make a reply.

Detailing about the achievements made by the Election Commission during his tenure as its chief, Dr Gill said the commission had been successful in getting vacated several cases against the Commission in the Supreme Court and various high courts.

Among the important cases which have been decided recently include the case pertaining to date of enforcement of the model code of conduct, the usage of electronic voting machines, disciplinary jurisdiction of the Election Commission over election staff and compulsory identification of electors by means of electors photo-identity cards (EPICs), he said.

Regarding the case pertaining to the model code of conduct, Dr Gill said the government and the EC had reached an agreement declaring that the announcement of election would be made “ordinarily not more than three weeks” in advance of the notification date, upholding the validity of the model code of conduct.

This agreement was placed before the Supreme Court on April 26 last which disposed of an appeal of the government against a 1997 order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which ruled that the commission could enforce the model code from the date of announcement of election by it, the Chief Election Commissioner said.

“With the disposal of the appeal of the government on April 26 to the mutual satisfaction of the commission and the government there is no other contentious issue between them now pending adjudication before the Supreme Court and any high court,” he said.

On the challenge to large-scale use of EVMs in the May 10 assembly elections in five states, Dr Gill said the apex court dismissed on April 23 last a special leave petition filed by the AIADMK at the admission stage itself, finding no merit in it.

However, he said the commission had withheld its decision to order more EVMs to take their number from present three lakh machines to five lakh, observing that he would like to watch how they behaved in the coming assembly poll.

All future assembly and parliamentary elections would be on EVMs, he added.