Time the electoral system is reviewed

UNION Law Minister Kiren Rijiju recently announced that the government was in discussion with the Election Commission (EC) on bringing about major electoral reforms. Reportedly, over 80 proposals have been made by the EC from time to time over the past two decades. Some of the proposals need to be considered on priority.

I propose reforms in four broad categories: strengthening the Election Commission, increasing transparency, cleansing politics and improving the electoral system itself.

The measure of foremost importance is ensuring the non-partisanship and impartiality of the EC. For this, the appointment of election commissioners must be made transparent. A collegium, comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition and the Chief Justice of India (CJI), as recommended in the 255th report of the Law Commission of India, is the obvious answer. The elevation to the CEC’s post must be automatic by seniority, such as is done for the CJI’s post.

The two commissioners must be given the security of tenure, like the CEC. Without that, they feel they are on probation and can be controlled by the government. And, by a majority of 2:1, they can control an independent-minded CEC.

Just as the commissioners need security from removal from office in order to act impartially, so do the officials conducting the elections need it. When the elections are announced, the officers are controlled and protected by the EC. However, as soon as the elections are over, they are back at the mercy of the government. Often, the independently acting officials are punished by the government of the day by punitive posting and even suspension, sometimes. Their fault: they acted neutrally on the orders of the EC. Therefore, for at least six months after the elections, all postings of electoral officials must be done in consultation with the EC.

Additionally, the EC’s reputation suffers when it is unable to take action against recalcitrant political parties. Despite being the registering authority under Section 29A of the Representation of the People (RP) Act, 1951, it has no power to even impose a token fine, not to speak of power to de-register the parties, despite the gravest of violations. The EC should be given power to act against a political party for serious offences.

The role of money power in elections has been an issue of concern for nearly three decades. The EC has been demanding transparency of fund collection and expenditure of political funds. Ironically, electoral bonds, which were introduced in the name of transparency, ended up doing just the opposite.

The following reforms should be considered: make the names of donors and recipients of electoral bonds public; stop all corporate donations and replace them with state funding of political parties. A national election fund could be created, to which all donations can be made. The fund could then be allocated to political parties on the basis of their electoral performance; political party funds should be audited by independent auditors and reports be put in the public domain. Besides, to cut down the huge expenditure on elections, the ceiling on expenditure must be extended to political parties.

Criminalisation of politics has been a constant threat to the proper functioning of democracy in India. According to the Association for Democratic Reforms, nearly half of the 17th Lok Sabha members have criminal charges against them, many of them heinous. The EC’s long-pending demand and the National Law Commission’s recommendation to ban charge-sheeted candidates must be accepted.

In recent years, hate speech and disinformation have acquired a systemic presence in the media and on the Internet. There are ample provisions in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and RP Act to handle this. Curbing these by preventive or prompt action must be made the responsibility of the district police chief.

The government spending on display advertisements before the elections for political publicity has assumed obscene proportions. The EC has repeatedly suggested that these advertisements be prohibited, starting from six months before the elections.

Time has come for us to review the electoral system itself. Currently, we follow the Westminster model that is based on the first-past-the-post system in which the candidate with the highest number of votes, irrespective of the margin of victory or percentage of votes polled, is declared the winner.

For a long time, I was a strong advocate of this system because of its simplicity. However, I felt compelled to reconsider my position after the 2014 General Election, in which the Bahujan Samaj Party, which, with the third largest vote share (4.2 per cent) nationally, and 20 per cent in the state, did not get even a single seat in the Lok Sabha.

We should, therefore, look at the proportional representation system in which every party gets a share of seats proportional to the share of votes it secures. Ideally, a mixed model, as is followed in countries like Germany, Sri Lanka and Nepal, may be considered.

Another issue that keeps cropping up is regarding the violation of the model code in multi-phase elections when political leaders participate in campaigning and meetings and, thus, make a mockery of the “silent period” imposed by law before each phase of elections. Several other issues arising out of prolonged elections were raised by Prime Minister Narendra Modi years ago, like the dislocation of the normal working of the administration, huge costs of campaigns, etc. A prolonged election also creates its own set of communal and caste tensions. Then there is the constant irritant of opinion and exit poll instructions getting flouted regularly.

The solution is simple. Let’s revert to single-phase elections. The only reason for multi-phase elections is law and order control, which requires Central Armed Police Forces, which are in short supply and have to be rotated. The answer is easy: make available larger number of companies, but for a shorter period (for a month instead of three months).

Finally, ever since the introduction of EVMs, the secrecy of voting at a polling booth has vanished and it has led to reprisal by the ruling party by punishing the village/community for not voting for it. The EC has been suggesting the adoption of ‘Totaliser’ (electronic substitute of ballot mixing). This must be adopted.

The recent announcement by the Law Minister, along with Prime Minister Modi’s oft-repeated desire to carry out electoral reforms, presents us with a great opportunity which should not be missed.

If the government focuses only on these few reforms out of the long list of 80-plus proposals, the country will take a big step towards making the largest democracy on the planet the greatest too.