Is ‘cash for vote’ the harsh reality of the poll process
ADULT suffrage, guaranteed by Article 326 of the Constitution of India, is the foundation of elections to Parliament and Legislative assemblies. Every citizen of India above the age of 18, who is not otherwise disqualified, is entitled to be registered as a voter. This right alone is the backbone of democracy, where each head counts rather than money power, social status or military might.
The foremost duty of the Election Commission of India (ECI) is to ensure free, fair and impartial elections. It is the sole constitutional authority to exercise supervision over elections.
Interference from the courts has been barred in election matters under Article 329 of the Constitution. Only a petition can be filed after the polling is over.
However, the ground reality is that electioneering in India is often a saga of treachery, manipulated processes and blatant misuse of money and muscle power under the watch of those supposed to ensure a level playing field for all contestants.
Corrupt practices are so widespread and varied that election observers may not notice them all as they seem primarily concerned with keeping the polling process unhindered.
From the moment candidates are finalised, free liquor begins to flow on the streets, especially in colonies inhabited by underprivileged masses, often situated on the outskirts of towns or villages. People know where to fetch their supply and the police typically turn a blind eye. Everyone understands which party is the supplier.
Those consuming alcohol as part of this distribution can be seen wandering around distribution points opened by candidates indiscriminately. Digital payments to liquor vendors upon the presentation of a signed voucher from a candidate’s agent make the supply hassle-free.
Expenditures on unaccounted liquor surpass all other election expenses, making liquor a significant factor determining the outcome of the ballot battle in many elections.
“Cash for vote” is a harsh reality. The amount varies, depending on the election’s importance and the voter’s status. Cash is often distributed through local contractors who align with potential vote buyers to ensure a certain number of votes from the locality for a specific candidate.
Some candidates even engage in direct vote-buying on the polling day by operating from behind the voting-slip desk, offering cash under the guise of distributing slips. The going rate for impersonated votes can be as high as Rs 5,000 per vote.
Interestingly, many greedy elected representatives of local bodies and gram panchayats form groups just before elections and collectively bargain with candidates for votes under their influence.
Political party manifestos are often just academic documents for debates on national media. The elections on the ground are generally contested on local issues, where the candidate choice plays a crucial role.
However, some attractive promises like monthly pensions or laptops for voters can also instantly sway voters.
Caste, creed, religion and faith play significant roles in determining election outcomes, with candidates openly seeking support from religious leaders and seers.
Political narratives are daily set by rival parties, and the social media (SM) plays a crucial role. The ECI has yet to address the unbridled influence of the SM and YouTubers in electioneering.
The financial demands of SM platforms and freelance YouTubers on candidates are often steep. They may even attempt to influence the candidates’ public statements to either unsettle or harm their prospects if not compensated adequately.
Paid news and malicious campaigns have become a reality.
The local police and administration often ignore the ruling party’s malpractices despite the best intentions of the district-level authorities as lower-level officials, who must work in the district, cannot afford to annoy influential local politicians.
The observers appointed by the ECI offer a mechanism to candidates to file complaints and deter wrongdoers to some extent, but their effectiveness is limited due to the reliance on the local authorities. Moreover, they often prefer to simply monitor the situation rather than take a proactive stance.
Sections 169 to 177 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 (BNS) provide punishment of up to one year of imprisonment for bribery and corrupt practices in elections. However, these provisions are non-cognisable. It means that the police cannot register a First Information Report (FIR), rendering them toothless and redundant. Election offences should be made cognisable, attracting severe punishment.
The electoral process in a democratic system must not be allowed to be corrupted by vested interests. It is the responsibility of the ECI to address new irregularities in electioneering and introduce corrective measures.
The campaign process needs an overhaul. National media debates could replace traditional rallies in this digital era and publicity materials should be banned. Election staff should be from outside the district and elections should be held under President’s rule in a state.
The ECI should take strict action against officials for misconduct during elections. Offenders in cases registered during elections often go unpunished due to a lack of supervision and monitoring by the ECI.
The ECI observers should investigate and hold political parties accountable for corrupt practices by their workers. The ECI’s approach towards poll malpractices needs a paradigm shift.
Report filed from a real election battlefield
