Cancellation of RK Nagar bypoll is like ordering abortion after allowing the sin
If some ‘critics’ are crying foul at the Election Commission’s decision to cancel the RK Nagar by-election, a large part of the blame lies at the doors of Nirvachan Sadan, its headquarters in Delhi. Over a period of time, the Election Commission has come under attack from various parties and personalities accusing it of losing its autonomy and political neutrality, and worse, the will to assert itself.
The rise of BJP to power with a thumping majority appears to have worsened the matters for the poll body – with it pussyfooting around crucial issues, be it the timing of the union budget or allowing the Prime Minister’s monthly radio broadcast, which could potentially distort level playing field during elections. The Commission’s seemingly political response to allegations against EVM tampering was not only inappropriate but sounded like it was echoing ruling party’s words.
Every move in the sequence of events leading to the cancellation of by-elections was so predictable that it raised doubts about the Commission’s neutral and non-partisan stance. When the ruling party in Tamil Nadu was at loggerheads with the powers that be at Delhi, every step initiated by the Commission to ensure a free and fair poll could lend itself to be interpreted, particularly by the ‘affected’ critics, as being taken at the behest of one party and blatantly against another, even if neither was a saint.
These steps included the freezing of Two Leaves poll symbol which could adversely affect the AIADMK-Amma (ie., the Sasikala faction) electoral fortunes substantially, ordering transfer of officials perceived to be close to the State dispensation and deploying a record number of poll observers.
Even though there was no iota of evidence, critics of Modi were ready to believe that the BJP had used Constitutional institutions, first the Governor’s Office and later even the judiciary, to punish Sasikala and her party. Such was the political scenario and the timing of events. To them, therefore, it did not seem incredulous that the Election Commission would be above such politicking.
On the face of it, the Election Commission could have acted on its own volition, leveraging the powers vested in it by the Constitution. But its track record does not inspire such confidence. After the heyday of the Commission under the helm of strongman TN Seshan in the politically volatile Nineties, the Commission slowly relapsed into its previous self.
For instance, it could not conclusively prove that its biggest game-changer – the Electronic Voting Machine (EVMs) – was safe and foolproof. And, when the controversy reared its head yet again during the UP Assembly elections, this time it seemed there were more takers than in the past – which is a sad commentary on the credibility of both the Commission and the BJP.
The decision to scrap the RK Nagar by-election raises critical questions that beg for convincing answers. It was an open secret that money would play a big role in the do-or-die election for the cash-rich AIADMK faction led by Sasikala. The Commission, which is insulated from executive interference and despite having the powers and the wherewithal to nip votes-for-notes bribery in the bud, frittered away the opportunity and ended up cancelling the byelection just two days before the polling. It is the tacit admission of its inability to prevent bribery when it could have; it is like ordering abortion after failing to prevent the sin.
Secondly, in trying to punish a cash-rich party, the Commission has willy-nilly ended up penalising other parties, especially those which have been fighting the elections on a shoe-string budget. When the byelection is conducted in future, the cash-rich party would still have the money to play the game, while the relatively smaller and already emaciated resource-scarce parties would be at huge disadvantage in Round Two.
So the question is – how will the Commission ensure that political parties are prevented from buying votes and subverting electoral democracy or, for that matter, from indulging in other activities that taint the electoral verdict. And, the more important larger question is, how the Commission will ensure that in future powerful parties – both national and regional – are prevented from indulging in unfair practices that rob the elections of their sanctity and credibility; for instance, manipulating elections through caste violence or communal riots and the consequent polarisation. And therein lies the rub.
Can the Election Commission ever return to its halcyon days when its courageous assertion of will had instilled trust and confidence in elections and with it in the electoral democracy itself? This is more needed now than ever before.
(The writer is ajournalist-columnist and teaches at the Asian College of Journalism)
