Opposition leaders keep questioning the decisions and actions of the EC, Supreme Court, CBI, even the Indian Army.
Immediately after the announcement of the Vidhan Sabha elections of Himachal Pradesh and Gujarat, the Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party accused the Election Commission and its system of favoritism. Some politicians and spokespersons may be new clumsy players, but many veteran Congressmen or members of the Opposition will remember that at some point in time, members of a Prime Minister’s family went to their residence to complete the legal process of marriage. Even the officers with personal relations have been the Chief Election Commissioners of the country. An officer who was a senior secretary with the Prime Minister or Chief Minister also became the Election Commissioner. But the impartiality of these Election Commissioners was not questioned. Now seeing the possibility of electoral defeat, the Congress leaders are trying to soot on the Election Commission like an unnecessary ruckus of “Jungle Mein Lion Aaya”. Sometimes they question the electronic voting machine started by their own government in the country, sometimes on the election officer. In elections in which one’s candidate is victorious, then the electoral system seems to be fair; in the event of an election defeat, instead of accepting the decision of the public, they vote and accuse the officer of dishonesty.
If this is not criticism and irresponsible work, then what will it be called? Why not announce election dates together? Despite the horrific Morbi accident, why not on the same or the next day? What was the delay for the Prime Minister’s state program? On such questions, the Chief Election Commissioner replied with great restraint and decency that the dates have been announced as per rules—110 days before the end of the term of the present Legislative Assembly and the results of both the states are being declared simultaneously on 8 December. But the opposition leaders are not hesitant to put a question mark on the decisions and actions of the Election Commission, Supreme Court, CBI, even the Indian Army, pouring filth on their impartiality. To tarnish the honest image of constitutional and democratic institutions and their top persons is to spoil the image of Indian democracy.
Due to deteriorating image of the country and democracy, foreign companies and overseas Indians eager to invest huge capital in India are also stuck in dilemma. In a democracy, socio-economic development is natural with differences, dissatisfaction, political opposition, accusations, legal action, but there should be no boundary line.
Rahul Gandhi and his ignorant allies can study at least 50 years of speeches of senior leaders of their party, speeches at conferences and scathing speeches of opposition leaders in Parliament or even outside. Indira Gandhi had to go to jail for a few days after she was removed from power, there were many raids, but she or her allies did not accuse her of ending democracy. Later, she and the party came to power, then there was opposition from the movements, but no one said that democracy has ended.
There are allegations of prejudice and political vendetta, but Lalu Yadav, who has been in jail for months, also takes out anger on Nitish or Prime Minister Narendra Modi by asking for justice from the court, but does not argue for the absence of democracy. Leaders like Jai Prakash Narayan, Morarji Desai, Chaudhary Charan Singh, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Madhu Limaye, George Fernandez remained in jail, but later did not give unrestrained and indecent statements on the whole system.
Twenty years ago, in many states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Punjab, there used to be incidents of fake voting, loot of ballot boxes and violent struggle at polling stations and the administration became helpless. In some cases, many villages used to be evacuated due to the fear of threats made by the Bahubalis and their supporters to win the elections. In recent years, honest and dedicated officials have made the electoral system more and more fair, modern and fear-free. Now reports of violence and looting are rarely seen. Transparency like election campaigning, monitoring of expenditure, curbing illegal methods, public declaration of candidates’ qualification background income etc. is being done. Recognition to political parties, hearing on complaints made after victory and defeat has increased the credibility of the system. First, there was one election commissioner in the country, then there were two. Then after a decision of the court, the members of the Election Commission became three. A high-level committee recommends a person with long administrative experience to be made the election commissioner to the government. Election commissioners are accountable only to the President and the Supreme Court rather than any political party or government. During the election process, the administrative system of the states comes to the Election Commission.
In any democratic system, administrative officers or judges also come on the basis of knowledge and experience of the same society and region.
Most of the officers in CBI are kept on deputation from the states. They are not brought by any one party or angel. Lawyers can become judges or leaders and ministers too. How many lawyers come to Parliament or Vidhan Sabha? Some of them also become ministers and after leaving the post, they start practicing law again. After all, any position increases the expectation of the person responsible to perform his duty honestly. Some people can be exceptions. But in 75 years, the roots of democracy have been strengthened by conscientious people and will continue to do so.
The author is Editorial Director of ITV Network-India News and Aaj Samaj Dainik.