Author: Nidhyasri

Introduction:

India is the largest Democratic Nation in the world with the adoption of its own constitution on January 26, 1950. To be termed as a democratic nation, the citizens of the nation will choose their leader by way of election. The role of free and fair election is crucial for any democratic nation and to assist it the India Election Commission is constituted under Article 324 of the Indian Constitution. The Election Commission’s transparency in conducting election is significant and it must ensure to eliminate duplicate votes, voter roll errors. This article examines the accountability of the Election Commission in ensuring fair election and transparency in conducting elections and disclosure of electoral roles when the public demands veracity. 

Legal and Constitutional Frameworks:

The Election Commission is established under Article 324 of the Indian Constitution, which also outlines its duties and authority. Supervising, directing, and controlling the creation of electoral rolls and holding elections at the state, parliamentary, President and Vice President levels are among its main responsibilities. The Commission, an autonomous constitutional body, is essential to preserving democracy. The Election Commissioner has the same tenure security as a Supreme Court judge and can only be dismissed for comparable reasons. Because of this high position, the Election Commissioner has a significant obligation to maintain honesty, equity, and accountability to the country’s citizens.

The Representation of the People Act, 1950 and The Representation of the People Act, 1951 enables the Election Commission to operationalise its functions. The 1950 Act governs with the Preparation and Revision of Electoral Roles and the 1951 Act governs with the procedure of actual conduct of elections such as to include nominated candidates, prevent corruption, settlement of election disputes and disqualification of members. 

The Supreme Court in People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India (2003) 4 SCC 399 upheld the accountability of the Election Commission and recognised right to know about candidates contesting in elections as a part of the Right to Freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a) enabling the voters to access criminal records, educational qualification and financial status of the candidates participating in election. Thereby expanding the scope of accountability in transparency.

The Supreme Court in Subramanian Swamy v. Election Commission of India (2013) 10 SCC 500, ordered to introduce VVPAT (Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail) along with EVM (Electronic Voting Machine) to ensure the right to verify his vote through technological safeguards for free and fair election for indispensable public confidence in voting.

These above frameworks and Apex Court ruling ensures transparency, independence in conducting legitimate election and accountability of election commission.

Challenges of Transparency:

The Duplicate voting and multiple entries in the electoral rolls:

The issue of duplicate votes is one of the major concerns of the democratic nation. The true essence of democracy is taken away by duplicate votes. This includes single person voting in multiple states vide twin registration. This undermines the principle of “One Nation, One Vote”

Lack or Weak Voter verification:

Voter Verification forms one of the integral parts of function of the Election Commission. This issue is raised when impersonation, undeleted names of fake, unverified and deceased entries together with misuse of software for fraudulent duplicate registration. 

Lack of Data Accessibility:

The voters do not have accessibility to electronic records of voters, compliant and audit trails. The problem majorly evolves is only PDF records are provided and electronic records remains inaccessible to verify the veracity of the electoral rolls. The application for information through The Right to Information Act, 2005 is often denied on the grounds of Confidentiality. This has again raised the issue of transparency of elections conducted.

Political interference:

Election Commission is a constitutional and independent body and thus it must act accordingly without the interference of Political influence.   This involves leniency towards certain camping violation of one party and lack of disclosure in internal decision which will ultimately leads to erosion of public trust.

Accountability of ECI (Election Commission of India):

Judicial Oversight:

The decision of Election Commission is subject to judicial review under Articles 226 and 32 of the Indian Constitution. The Judiciary acts as constitution safeguard to ensure its acts within the authority and restricts its arbitrariness.

The Supreme Court of India in Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner (1978 AIR 851), held that every order of the Election Commission must be open to judicial scrutiny if it affects the fairness of elections and in A.C. Jose v. Sivan Pillai (1984 AIR 921), it clarified that while the ECI has plenary powers, they cannot contravene existing laws made by Parliament.

Parliamentary Oversight:

The Parliament has indirect oversight over the Election Commission vide Legislative control wherein it has the absolute authority to amend or reframe statutes governing election namely the Representation of the People Acts, 1950 and 1951 to strengthen transparency and accountability. 

Citizens Oversight:

The Right to Information Act, 2005 is tool that holds ECI accountable to disclose the information regarding electoral rolls, expenditure, appointment of officers, voter data management, internal decisions and code of conduct. 

Accountability of ECI towards public:

Recent allegations on Election Commission by the Opposition Leader of Congress Mr. Rahul Gandhi has diminished the public confidence towards the neutrality, integrity and legitimacy in the outcome of the election. The allegation involves duplicate voter rolls, political influence, non or selective enforcement of election codes and non-disclosure of electronic records. The Election Commission of India must abide by higher degree of public accountability. It must follow reforms in periodic checks on voter data accuracy, redress the public grievance in timely manner and publication of meeting minutes and orders to boost public trust over the democracy.

Reforms:

Technological Reforms:

India must adopt digitalised and tech based electoral reforms to promote accuracy of data.

Aadhar – Voter ID Linkage:

The Voter ID can be linked to Aadhar to avoid duplicate and fraudulent entries together with cautiousness in protecting the data of the citizens.

Forming Separate Departments or Commissions:

The Election Commission can form separate commission to conduct, oversee third party audits and identify addition, deletion or any other discrepancies and publishing the findings of the same in online portals to ensure transparency. This department also oversee and safeguard electronic records of the elections conducted across the states.

Digital Public Portal:

The Government can introduce separate public portals for recording of grievance relating to election by the public. This portal should also address the timely redressal of the complaints filed

Procedural Reforms:

The procedural reforms must be undertaken by the Election Commission to ensure smooth operation of elections:

Uniform Voter verification:

Consistent and uniform standards in verification of electoral rolls and its maintenance must be established across states 

Internal Audits:

Internal Audits must be conducted to assess data accuracy, procedural fairness and compliance to rules and regulation. 

Time bound response:

Election Commission must ensure procedural fairness and time bound redressal of grievances and RTI applications.

Legal Reform:

A legal amendment can be introduced in Representation of Peoples Act, mandating electronic publication of verified electoral rolls ensuring to access to deletion and addition of members. The above data can be protected from misuse by enacting a separate data protection statute. A separate Investigation Committee must be formed to oversee the non-collaboration of election commission with stakeholders in the election.

Conclusion:

The Election Commission of India is the cornerstone of India’s Democratic identity and must stand with the principal of free and fair election. The Legal and Procedural reforms together with technological incorporation into the process will strengthen the integrity and statutory clarity among the people of the nation. The citizens must be empowered to question, verify and participate in the democratic obligation which ultimately determines their representative.