Should be seen as impartial

Chief Election Commissioner Sunil Arora’s homilies on election commissioners being independent minded functionaries cut no ice. He has a lot of explaining to do as regards to the deference he has allegedly shown to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Bharatiya Janata Party president Amit Shah over the complaints of violations of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC). Things came to such a pass that Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa, who disagreed with his panel’s decisions to clear Modi and Shah of MCC violation, recused himself after May 4 from all meetings to discuss MCC issues.

“The three members of EC are not expected to be template or clones of each other, there have been so many times in the past when there has been a vast diversion of views as it can, and should be,” Arora said in a statement on Lavasa’s purported letter to him about his displeasure.

But isn’t it obvious, Mr. Arora? The election commissioners are appointed by the President, have fixed tenures; they enjoy the same status and receive salary and perks as available to Judges of the Supreme Court; they can be removed from office only through impeachment by Parliament. Such worthies surely can’t be clones.

Arora tried to make light of Lavasa’s recusal: “It needs to be clarified categorically and unambiguously that this is purely an internal matter of ECI and as such any speculation, innuendoes and insinuations in this regard should be eschewed. It also needs to be mentioned that a meeting had already been scheduled on Tuesday, i.e., 21.5.2019 to discuss this and related matters.”

Did you say “purely an internal matter,” Mr. Arora? How can the accusations of partisanship by a constitutional body be dismissed as an internal matter? Perhaps the charges of favoritism against you by the Opposition and many political commentators are not correct, perhaps they are overreacting, but the fact is that you have been accused of having been pro-government; and an important institution like the EC should not just be impartial but also seen to be impartial. You ought to come out with a reasoned response to the allegations hurled at you; a bland denial won’t do.

Lavasa wanted a notice to be sent to Modi, but Arora and the other Election Commissioner, Sushil Chandra, didn’t agree with him. While Modi was reportedly let off in at least half a dozen complaints, Congress president Rahul Gandhi got a clean chit only in one case.

Lavasa is said to have written to Arora on May 4, demanding more “transparency” in decisions over MCC violations. Lavasa was also miffed that the dissenting views didn’t reflect in the EC’s final decision, something which was “contrary to well established conventions of multi member statutory bodies.”

Some of the complaints the poll panel deliberated upon were Modi’s speech at Nanded in Maharashtra on April 6 where he referred to the majority being a minority in Wayanad (Rahul Gandhi’s second constituency) and the speech in Varanasi where he mentioned the killing of terrorists to avenge the death of 40 troopers in Pulwama. Shah also escaped any adverse remark from the EC for his statement at an election rally in Kerala where he reportedly said that it was not easy to say whether Wayanad is in India or Pakistan.

As a votary of free speech, I believe that the EC should stop behaving like a school master and let politicians say what they want to say in their election campaigns. Freedom of expression during polls should be governed by the same laws as during other periods. Please see ‘To Reveal Real Nature of Our Netas, Election Commission Should Stop Playing School Master’ (https://www.news18.com/news/opinion/to-reveal-real-nature-of-our-netas-election-commission-should-stop-playing-school-master-2122267.html). However, if the poll panel decides to act as a schoolmaster, it should not be partial to some naughty boys while turning a blind eye to others.

This is a call Arora must take. Lest he wants to go down in history as somebody who helped undermine an important institution.