Baseless charges are being hurled at the Election Commission by the Opposition.
New Delhi: Once again, Congress, Aam Aadmi Party, Sharad Pawar’s Nationalist Congress Party, Uddhav Thackeray’s Shiv Sena etc. accused the Election Commission and its system of bias. Rahul Gandhi, who was upset with the results of Maharashtra and Haryana assembly elections, started making these allegations from the Lok Sabha and outside at the beginning of the budget session of Parliament. In the Delhi assembly elections, Arvind Kejriwal and other leaders of Aam Aadmi Party made allegations by taking the name of Election Chief Commissioner Rajiv Kumar and almost abusing him. The Samajwadi Party chief even made indecent demonstrations like putting shrouds on the Election Commission. Along with the defeat in this protest, the intention to obstruct the appointment of a new Election Commissioner and destroy the credibility of the upcoming elections including Bihar is clearly visible.
Rahul Gandhi has made a big allegation against the Election Commission of India. Rahul Gandhi said that irregularities have been found in the voters and voting list in the Maharashtra assembly elections. Now the Election Commission’s response has come to light on this. The Election Commission has hit back at Congress MP Rahul Gandhi’s allegations of irregularities in the Maharashtra voter list and said that a reply will be given with full facts in this matter.
An impression is being created that the Election Commission is a single-member body. The Election Commission said that more than 1.5 lakh officers are taking action on the issues raised by political parties and candidates in the Delhi Assembly Elections 2025. It was said that these officers are doing their work with complete impartiality. On the other hand, Aam Aadmi Party’s national convenor Arvind Kejriwal and other senior AAP leaders are alleging that the Election Commission is not taking action against BJP workers for violating the code of conduct.
Many old and experienced Congressmen or opposition members would remember that at one time, officers who had personal relations with a Prime Minister during his service, including visiting his residence to complete the legal formalities of his family marriage, have been the Chief Election Commissioners of the country. Officers who were senior secretaries to a Prime Minister or Chief Minister have also become Election Commissioners. But the impartiality of these Election Commissioners was not questioned. Now, seeing the possibility of electoral defeat, Congress leaders are trying to tarnish the image of the Election Commission by making unnecessary hue and cry. Sometimes they question the electronic voting machine introduced by their own government in the country, and sometimes the election officer. In the election in which their candidate wins, the electoral system seems fair and impartial, but in case of electoral defeat, instead of accepting the decision of the people, they accuse the election, voting and the officer of dishonesty. As far as voting machines are concerned, not only former Chief Election Commissioners O.P. Rawat, S.Y. Qureshi, Sunil Arora but even Supreme Court Chief Justice Chandrachud have said that the use of the machines is completely reliable. They say that parties start making hue and cry about justice when they get a favourable win or a court verdict and as soon as it is unfavourable, they start making hue and cry about injustice and irregularities.
What else can this be called if not criticism and irresponsibility? But the opposition leaders are not hesitating at all in questioning the decisions and actions of the Election Commission, Supreme Court, CBI, even the Indian Army, and tarnishing their impartiality. Tarnishing the honest image of constitutional and democratic institutions and their top officials is surely tarnishing the image of Indian democracy. Due to the tarnishing of the image of the country and democracy, foreign companies and NRIs eager to invest huge capital in India are also getting into a dilemma. In a democracy, differences, discontent, political opposition, allegations and counter-allegations, legal action along with socio-economic development are natural, but shouldn’t there be a limit?
Rahul Gandhi and his ignorant colleagues can at least study the speeches of senior leaders of their party, their statements in conferences and the fiery speeches of opposition leaders in and outside Parliament for the last fifty years. With the exception of the Emergency, leaders of almost all major parties and ideologies have been in power and in opposition. Indira Gandhi had to go to jail for a few days after she lost power, many raids were conducted, but neither she nor her colleagues said democracy was ending. Later, when she and her party came to power, there were protests but no one said that democracy had ended. Allegations of bias and political revenge are made. Lalu Yadav also vents his anger on Prime Minister Narendra Modi by talking of justice from the court. Leaders like Jai Prakash Narayan, Morarji Desai, Chaudhary Charan Singh, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Madhu Limaye, George Fernandes were in jail, but later they did not give baseless and indecent statements on the entire system.
Remember, 20 years ago, in many states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Punjab, there were incidents of fake voting, looting of ballot boxes and violent clashes at polling booths and the administration became helpless. In some villages, many villages used to be vacated due to the fear of threats given by musclemen and their supporters to win the elections. In recent years, honest and dedicated officers have made the election system more and more fair, modern and fearless. Now, news of violence and looting is rarely seen. Transparency like monitoring of election campaign, expenditure, curbing illegal methods, public declaration of candidates’ qualifications, background, income etc. is benefiting. Recognition to political parties, hearing of complaints made after victory or defeat has increased the credibility of the system. Earlier, there was one Election Commissioner in the country, then there were two. Then, after a court decision, the members of the Election Commission became three. A high-level committee recommends to the government that a person with long administrative experience should be made the Election Commissioner. Election commissioners are answerable only to the President and the Supreme Courts, rather than to any political party or government. During the election process, the administration of the states comes under the Election Commission.
The issue of ‘one country, one election’ should also be understood in a similar way. If Prime Minister Narendra Modi has raised it, then why should it be considered only as an issue of his party’s absolute rule and eternal power? This is possible only in dictatorship or communist system. The most important thing is that this is not a new Modi mantra. It is just adopting the ideal system that was in place from 1952 to 1967 on the basis of democracy established by the constitution makers. It is also not the case that if simultaneous elections are held in the country, the expenses will increase by crores or that regional and local level parties or independent candidates will not be able to win. Seventy years of history is a witness that billionaire industrialists, kings, Maharajas, even Prime Ministers have lost elections and there have been ministers and Prime Ministers without getting elected among the people at the Panchayat level. Yes, a large section of people who earn crores of rupees every year from election business like the middlemen of the market will suffer financial loss. Not only this, if elections continue to be held, then the leaders who gain importance in the parties on the basis of their voice and support will also have to suffer losses and will have to establish their dominance by staying in some House.
As far as the expenses are concerned, not only the political parties but also millions of voters and taxpayers of the country will save crores of rupees. According to a report by India’s prestigious research institute, Center for Media Studies, about sixty thousand crore rupees were spent in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. Just think, only ten crore rupees were spent in the first three Lok Sabha elections i.e. 1952, 1957 and 1962. After the liberal economy came, the wings of the parties and candidates started appearing studded with gold, silver, diamonds and pearls touching the sky. The courts and the Election Commission increased the limit of their legal
He is worshipped like a god, but natural calamities – floods, landslides, pollution, i.e. environment and red tape of bureaucrats and changing old laws that have been in place since the British Raj are not made top priority election issues. Most political parties give importance to the selection of candidates and their influence on the basis of caste and religion. The manifestos have big promises of ideology, principles, but many candidates do not even remember their entire manifesto and they put it up in the next election with slight changes. In recent years, when water and electricity became an issue, the emphasis was on giving it for free. It is definitely necessary to provide water, electricity, food grains, houses, education and health for the poor for free, but it is more important to make them capable of doing proper work and self-reliant in a few years. Economic progress could not be made in the communist rule of many countries including East Germany because people had become lazy in the name of mercy of power and so-called labor rights. After independence, India had some benefit from the influence of socialist ideas, but instead of the poor, the middle class and even the well-off people take more advantage of the free or concessional services provided by the government. They want domestic gas or electricity at the prices given to the poor people.
Similarly, political parties or other organizations talk about economic progress, industries and employment, but there is fierce opposition to giving land for building roads, bridges, factories. In many places, the work remains pending for years. In modernization, if industrial business companies start becoming influential in the country and abroad, then people start raising questions on the government regarding their benefits. After all, how many jobs can the government itself provide? If employment becomes an issue, then why is no voice raised in local elections for skill development? If there is a reform in agricultural laws to compete with Europe, a section stands up in protest. The desire is to enable the farmer to travel by plane and run a campaign to stop him from depending on bullock carts and middlemen. Anyway, not only Germany, but the countries of Europe, America, Japan and the Gulf are investing capital in India on a large scale and will do so. At least the stock market is indicating this. Elections may keep happening, democracy will be strengthened only when voters and leaders also keep their right priorities, make them issues and achieve success. In any democratic system, administrative officers or judges are appointed on the basis of knowledge and experience of that particular society and region. Most of the officers in CBI are appointed on deputation from the states. They are not brought by any one party or angel. Lawyers can become judges or leaders and ministers too. Many lawyers come to Parliament or Vidhan Sabha. Some of them become ministers and after leaving the post, they start practicing law again. Do companies get affected by their decisions while being ministers? But the expectation is that there will be impartiality in their work. After all, any post increases the expectation of a responsible person to perform his duty honestly. Some people can be exceptions. But in 75 years, the roots of democracy have been strengthened by dutiful people and will continue to be strengthened.