3 ex CJIs back simultaneous polls
Former CJI D Y Chandrachud, in his opinion submitted to the Joint Committee of Parliament, has dismissed the Opposition's criticism that the synchronisation of Lok Sabha and state Assembly polls violates the Constitution's basic structure, saying the Constitution never mandated holding national and state elections separately.
However, he has joined another ex-CJI Ranjan Gogoi in questioning the 'sweeping powers' granted to the Election Commission in the proposed constitutional amendment law 'without laying down any guidelines for the exercise of the discretion', according to the opinion submitted to the parliamentary panel.
Chandrachud and another former CJI J S Kehar are scheduled to appear before the committee headed by BJP MP P P Chaudhary on July 11 so that members can interact with them over the bill's provisions and seek their views on their queries.
Questioning the vast powers the bill seeks to bestow on the EC, Chandrachud said such 'unbounded authority' could enable the poll body to curtail or extend the tenure of a state assembly beyond the constitutionally mandated five years, under the pretext that simultaneous elections with the Lok Sabha are not feasible.
The Constitution must define, delineate and structure the circumstances under which the ECI may invoke this power, he added.
Two former CJIs, U U Lalit and Ranjan Gogoi, had appeared before the committee in February and March, respectively. During the interaction, Gogoi agreed with the concerns of some members over the excessive power given to the EC, sources have said.
Lalit had suggested that simultaneous polls should be rolled out in a staggered manner and not at one go, as he had said that cutting short the remaining terms of assemblies with substantive tenure left for the purpose of synchronising election cycles could be legally challenged.
However, all three ex-CJIs have not questioned the constitutionality of the concept of simultaneous polls.
Chandrachud said in his written opinion that simultaneous elections will not infringe upon the voters' right to elect their representatives and that the bill ensures that electors remain continuously represented by their duly elected MPs or MLAs.
He said, 'Arguments opposing simultaneous elections are based on the premise that the Indian electorate is naive and can be easily manipulated.' He said, 'The argument that staggered elections are a part of the Constitution's basic structure (or form part of the principles of federalism or democracy) does not hold. Staggered timing of elections cannot be considered as a feature of the original Constitution, let alone an immutable feature.'
However, his opinion is not without notes of caution over some of the bill's features or the likely implications if it is to be enacted.
Chandrachud has appeared to share the concern that simultaneous elections could marginalise smaller or regional parties due to the dominance of better-resourced national parties, saying it is a significant policy aspect that warrants legislative attention.
He said, 'To ensure a level playing field among political parties, the rules governing electoral campaigning, particularly those relating to campaign finance, must be strengthened.'
While the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, impose ceilings on the amount a candidate may spend during the election campaign, there are no corresponding limits on the expenditure incurred by political parties themselves, he noted. This gap in regulation weighs in the electoral process towards parties with greater financial resources, he said.
As the bill says that the term of a House elected after a midterm poll will be only for the remainder of the five year term, Chandrachud has said the ability of the government to take any meaningful project will be minimised if its tenure is only of a year or less as the Model Code of Conduct will come into force around six months before the next polls. Several MPs in the panel have also raised this point about the likely priorities and strength of a government elected for a short period.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
15 minutes ago
- Mint
Arun Maira: Dedication to the state's purpose is the key lesson we must learn from China
India is at a crossroads. Both the political Left and Right agree that the economy needs substantial reform, but disagree on the direction. The progressive Left wants more socialism with more liberal democracy; the conservative Right wants more free-market capitalism and seems willing to tolerate curbs on liberty. The Middle seems muddled. The 20th century was a test of competing economic ideologies—socialism versus capitalism; and competing forms of governance—liberal democracy versus authoritarianism. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, victory was declared for the Washington Consensus of free market capitalism and liberal democracy. India's reformers adopted the Washington formula in 1991. By and large, they gave up on socialism, abandoned industrial policies aimed at growing domestic industries and opened the Indian market for foreign companies without technology-transfer requirements. China did not yield. It stayed its socialist course with single-party governance and continued to build domestic industries. Also Read: Ajit Ranade: The success of 'Made in China 2025' alarmed the West The growth of China's economy is a miracle, economists say. In the 1980s, China and India's economies were comparable in size and per capita income. Now, China's per capita income and GDP are about five times India's. China's high-tech manufacturing sector has grown 48 times larger. The US, meanwhile, has grown alarmed with China's remarkable economic growth and industrial strength despite Beijing not following Washington's economic formula. That consensus has ended even in Washington, where ideological cracks have appeared with increasing inequality and unrest among workers in the US. The US is pressing India to come closer to it. India is wary. China shares a border with India that has seen the two armies skirmish. India must become self-reliant and stronger much faster than it has so far. Reforms must result in faster income growth among the Indian masses and stronger domestic industries. India's leaders should study China for lessons before pushing harder with economic reforms based on the West's failing model. Also Read: China began de-risking its economy well before Trump's trade fury US capitalism and Chinese socialism: Three recent books offer insights into how socialism and capitalism have been combined to achieve China's inclusive and fast growth. China's leaders are good learners, says German political economist Isabella M. Weber in How China Escaped Shock Therapy: The Market Reform Debate. Like Mahatma Gandhi, they kept their minds open, allowing ideas to come in from all directions without being blown off their feet. They listened to Western economists but applied only what suited China. Weber says, 'The famous Harvard development economist Dani Rodrik represents the economics profession more broadly when he answers his own question of whether 'anyone (can) name the (Western) economists or the piece of research that played an instrumental role in China's reforms" by claiming that 'economic research, at least as conventionally understood" did not play 'a significant role." Chinese economist Keyu Jin, a professor at the London School of Economics who grew up in China and experienced the Chinese system from within, explains how the Chinese socio-economic-political system works in The New China Playbook: Beyond Socialism and Capitalism. She explains why Western economic models, which strip out cultural and social forces from economics, cannot comprehend how China works—or even how Western economies work. She makes visible the 'invisible hand' that free-market economists cannot explain. She explains why the Chinese government keeps financial markets and the private sector reined in to ensure the market produces welfare for all, especially poorer and least powerful citizens. She says, 'The number of financial crises in China is exactly zero. It is also an oddity (from a Western perspective) that despite the nation's preternatural economic growth, its stock market has been one of the worst performing in the world." Also Read: Chinese history shows how a closed economy could squander a nation's greatness The Chinese government has added citizen satisfaction and environmental sustainability to GDP as a measure of its own performance (and of local governments). Though private firms grew nine-fold in China from 2000 to 2019 (their number now exceeds the US's by far), 'A more striking fact," says Lin, 'is that private owners with state connections owned about a third of the capital registered by these companies, showing how pervasive equity linkages between state and private businesses have become in China's corporate sector." While the government has reduced the number of state-owned enterprises and pushed the remainder to add profits to their social objectives, it also demands that private firms comply with societal needs. Large, private, property and tech firms that strayed from the socialist path have been cut down. Three distinctive features of China's governance: The purpose of the state, throughout China's long history from imperial times to the Communist era, has been the welfare of citizens. The best emperor was seen as one who provides the most welfare to all citizens, not one who wins the most wars. The leadership of the Communist Party has continued this role, says Chinese political scientist Zheng Yongnian in The Chinese Communist Party as Organizational Emperor: Culture, Reproduction, and Transformation. Jin explains further (in The New China Playbook) how the ruling party's commitment to this role has shaped Beijing's socio-economic policies, resulting in widespread support for the party even among the young. Also Read: Rahul Jacob: Manufacturing is crying out for a reality check The governance of China is highly decentralized. Local communities are given freedom to craft solutions suited to their needs; the performance of local party officials is measured by the satisfaction of their communities with progress. Chinese leaders and economists are 'systems thinkers.' They see the economy as only a component of a complex social system. For them, the purpose of economic growth is the production of societal well-being, especially for less powerful people. Whenever the economy begins to fail this purpose, reforms are made to bring it back to its socialist moorings. India must not slavishly follow Western models. Nor can India be China. India must find its own way to create a more equitable society. The author is a former member of the erstwhile Planning Commission and the author of 'Reimagining India's Economy: The Road to a More Equitable Society'.
Time of India
23 minutes ago
- Time of India
Reuters account on Twitter restored in India, email from the company says ‘At this time, we are no longer…'
Elon Musk-owned X has restored access to Reuters' official account in India, a day after it had been blocked due to a legal request. The main @Reuters account, followed by over 25 million users globally, was withheld in India on Saturday night. Indian users who tried to access it saw a message saying the account had been withheld 'in response to a legal demand.' However, a spokesperson for the Indian government's Press Information Bureau told Reuters that no government agency had requested the block. The official said they were working with X to resolve the issue. Another account, @ReutersWorld, which was also blocked in India, was restored later Sunday night. Announcing that the ban has now been lifted, Reuters quoted an email from X which said 'At this time, we are no longer withholding access in INDIA to your account'. Why Reuters account was banned in India Official sources told news agency PTI that a request to block Reuters' account was made during Operation Sindoor . The microblogging platform seems to have now acted on that request and blocking Reuters' account in the country. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Serbia: New Container Houses (Prices May Surprise You) Container House Search Now Undo In an earlier email dated May 16, X had told Reuters: 'It is our policy to notify account holders if we receive a legal request from an authorized entity (such as law enforcement or a government agency) to remove content from their account.' 'In order to comply with X obligations under India's local laws, we have withheld your X account in India under the country's Information Technology Act, 2000; the content remains available elsewhere,' the platform added. X did not specify which content triggered the action, who filed the request, or why it was made. The company noted that users can contact the secretary of India's Information and Broadcasting Ministry for further action. iOS 26 Beta 2 Hands-On: Apple Finally Does It
Time of India
23 minutes ago
- Time of India
Preamble like parenthood, cannot be changed 'howsoever you try': Vice President
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Monday said the Preamble of the Indian Constitution is like parenthood to children, and it cannot be changed, no matter how hard one may try. "There have been a lot of issues about the preamble to the Constitution. The Preamble of the Indian Constitution is something like parenthood to children. Howsoever you may try, you can't change your parenthood. That is not possible," he said. While interacting with students and faculty at the National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS), Kochi, he also said that, historically, no country's preamble has ever been changed, but lamented that the Preamble of the Indian Constitution was altered during the Emergency era . "The Preamble of our Constitution was changed during a time when hundreds and thousands of people were behind bars, the darkest period of our democracy--emergency era," he said. His statement comes against the backdrop of the RSS calling for a review of the words ' socialist ' and ' secular ' in the Preamble of the Constitution, stating that these were included during the Emergency and were never part of the Constitution drafted by B R Ambedkar . Live Events Addressing an event on 50 years of Emergency in New Delhi on June 26, RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabole said, "Babasaheb Ambedkar never used these words in the preamble of the Constitution. The words were added during Emergency, when fundamental rights were suspended, Parliament did not function, and the judiciary became lame."
