ഇന്ത്യൻ ജനാധിപത്യവും തിരഞ്ഞെടുപ്പ് കമ്മീഷനും: ഭരണഘടനാപരമായ അവകാശങ്ങളെക്കുറിച്ചുള്ള പുനർചിന്തനം

Summary

The country must recall debates in the Constituent Assembly that framed the Constitution and why it settled on universal adult franchise. The judiciary's role in strengthening the election process is significant too. All this assumes critical importance at a time of electoral roll revision anxiety.

Recent revelations about the inner workings of the Election Commission of India (ECI) have exposed an asymmetric and undemocratic working relationship between the three election commissioners.

This comes on top of widespread disenchantment with the commission's special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in which over 130 million people risk losing their franchise.

These recent events have not only stoked anxiety over the commission's motives but also fostered grave concerns over the future of Indian democracy and democratic institutions.

In the midst of all the intersecting commentary, it might be instructive to revisit India's founding debates about adult franchise, the ECI, its commissioner and a 1995 Supreme Court judgement on the shared responsibilities of the three election commissioners.

These milestones from our post-independence history should continue to serve as beacons when hope is turning into despair. At a time when the SIR exercise is colliding with Article 326 of the Constitution, which states that elections to the Lok Sabha and state assemblies must be on the basis of "adult suffrage," it might make sense to see the conditions under which this fundamental right was forged.

The founding fathers, early in the independence struggle, were resolute in their belief that true freedom would be meaningful only by arming every citizen with a vote. This found legal expression through the Constituent Assembly debates, set up to draft independent India's constitution.

Here is a flashback from one of its meetings on 29 April 1947. President Rajendra Prasad was presiding. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel placed the Interim Report of the Advisory Committee on the Subject of Fundamental Rights before members. The report asked for investing every Indian citizen above the age of 21 (brought down to 18 in 1988) with the right to vote. This right then became immutable and non-negotiable at this early stage of the proceedings.

Not every Assembly member was sold on the idea. Fast forward to 16 June 1949; Rajendra Prasad was again in the chair. The drafting committee chairman B.R. Ambedkar was also in the House.

Brajeshwar Prasad, a law graduate elected to the Constituent Assembly from Bihar, stood up in opposition: "I am opposed to adult franchise... because it is a gross violation of the tenets of democracy. Adult franchise presupposes that the electorate is enlightened. Where the electorate is not enlightened, there cannot be parliamentary democracy."

Many other representatives from higher caste groups had been opposed to the principle of one-person-one-vote. This loose-knit coalition had also been implying that the eligibility norms should remain unchanged from The Government of India Act of 1935, large chunks of which had already found their way into the draft constitution.

The colonial-era 1935 Act had granted only limited franchise, mainly to those who paid taxes, had cleared matriculation exams or owned property, thus restricting eligible Indian voters to only 20-25% of India's population.

In the words of Brajeshwar Prasad: "I fear that a House elected on the basis of adult suffrage will consist mostly of persons who are illiterate, and raw." He had the support of other enlightened members, such as Hriday Nath Kunzru, K.T. Shah (who also advocated a presidential form of government) and Frank Anthony.

Even Thakur Das Bhargava, educated at Lahore's Law College and Kolkata's Presidency College, actively argued for limiting voting rights to only the literate for the first 10 years.

All these attempts at resisting India's progression from a subjugated colony to a fully-functional democracy, largely from members belonging to privileged classes, hit a wall because of overwhelming support for universal adult franchise from day one. It had become an inviolable sacrament of faith and the leadership was determined not to entertain any dissent.

Jump-cut to SIR today and it may be tempting to view the exercise as a modern, morphed version of similar privileged gate-keeping; while that conclusion may be a bit premature, there is no denying that SIR remains exclusionary and antagonistic to Article 326.

Members of the Constituent Assembly were also clear-eyed that, logically, the fundamental right of universal adult franchise could only be met through the agency of an independent election commission, insulated from the executive's influence. The members strove to invest this body with sufficient autonomy to enable free and fair elections.

Initially, the central and state election commissions were to be instituted as separate entities, but this was later changed to a centralized structure on account of apprehensions that state or regional commissions may be disinclined to treat "non-natives" fairly.

There were also early attempts to clip the commission's powers; for example, there were proposals that the right to disqualify an election candidate should vest with either the governor of a state or the speaker of the relevant house. This was also quickly shot down.

The task of strengthening the election process and the ECI's working continued over the years. A critical inflection point came in 1993, when two more election commissioners were appointed -- on terms at par with the chief election commissioner.

This was challenged, but the Supreme Court in 1995 held that while the chief acts like a chairman, all three commissioners are equal in status and decisions should be by consensus -- or, if that fails, by majority vote. Recent exposés suggest that there could have been attempts to subvert the established process.

India's first election, held between October 1951 and February 1952, managed to enrol 173 million voters, a stupendous task. The ECI since then, under the leadership of various commissioners, has been in mission mode to ensure maximum participation in various elections and the number of registered voters reached 970 million by the 2024 general elections.

Ironically, the current SIR exercise -- riddled with glaring procedural lapses -- seems determined to reverse gains made over the past 80 years.

The author is a senior journalist and author of 'Slip, Stitch and Stumble: The Untold Story of India's Financial Sector Reforms' @rajrishisinghal