An impeachment move with no winners

A win-win situation benefits all stakeholders even if a compromise is reached in search of a workable alternative. It could even be a way in which the winning side deludes the losing side to perceive its loss as a necessary price it paid for survival. 

The impeachment motion of the Opposition parties against the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) is one such example. It is a motion destined not to carry. Yet its prime movers may not see the loss as a defeat. But can the CEC see their loss as his victory?

The move of the Opposition parties is doubtlessly dramatic. However, the question that needs to be pondered by the well-wishers of the Election Commission of India (ECI) is what prompted them to don the gloves for a fight with no chance of victory. Perhaps, sometimes one fights not to win but to wound the opponent. And the troubling part is that political parties treat the CEC as an opponent.

Steadfast defiance

The move to impeach the CEC is a first in the history of an institution that is supposed to be a vanguard of Indian electoral democracy. “India built many institutions after attaining freedom and adopting a Republican constitution…If anyone were to conduct an opinion poll on which of these institutions rendered the best service to Indian democracy with the highest degree of integrity, I have no doubt that the ECI will be our people’s first choice,” said Atal Bihari Vajpayee, the then Prime Minister at the ECI’s golden jubilee celebrations on January 17, 2001.

And now, 25 years later, 193 parliamentarians of the Opposition have submitted notices for an impeachment motion against the CEC citing charges of “partisan and discriminatory conduct”, “obstruction of investigation into electoral fraud” and disenfranchisement via the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The notice is as unprecedented as the manner in which the revision of electoral rolls has been undertaken despite serious challenge by most political parties, except the ruling dispensation. Such an alignment of thinking disconcerted the Opposition, which sharpened their attack against the CEC. The repeated press conferences by the Leader of the Opposition (LOP) exposing discrepancies in the electoral rolls of States where elections had been held, further eroded trust in the body.

While the aggressive style and severity of the LOP’s attack on the poll body, questioning its integrity was surprising, what was more surprising was the poll body’s obduracy in not providing a credible response to the doubts raised on its functioning and impartiality. As the attacks became more and more bitter, communication channels between the poll body and the opposition political parties seemed to choke.

The nation had seldom seen such a relentless campaign against a CEC even as the Supreme Court heard endless petitions against his decisions. As the petitions failed to yield any substantive relief, frustration mounted and so did the CEC’s apparent indifference. The CEC persisted with the SIR despite the fortnight-long Vote Adhikar Yatra just before the Bihar State elections. 

Not that there was no dialogue. The one between the poll body and the Trinamool Congress caused more rancour culminating in the theatrical presence of Mamata Banerjee in the Supreme Court. Never before had a Chief Minister appeared in Court arguing against the ECI’s unfair decisions. The dharnas against the SIR in West Bengal or officials dying in the course of conducting the SIR failed to deter the CEC or change his avowed commitment to “purify” the electoral rolls.

The ECI invented the “logical discrepancy” tool that pitted electors against the AI used to detect discrepancies. West Bengal saw 58,20,899 electors deleted at the draft stage and 60,06,675 “under adjudication” in the final list. But the ECI went on to announce elections in the State, where the fate of nearly 10% electors remained undetermined. It employed micro-observers for finalising the revised rolls, something never done in the past. The SC also took the extraordinary step of appointing over 500 judicial officers to decide the fate of these electors in a short span.

It is unusual for a constitutional body mandated with electoral rolls preparation to involve another constitutional body in discharging its routine functions by disregarding the elector’s voting right, which it was created to protect. The exclusion of even a single eligible voter due to the way the SIR has been conducted would legitimise the criticism of this arbitrary and aggressive exercise.

A loss for the common man

However, does all of this justify the impeachment move? The answer depends on which side of the divide one stands. The crores of voters who figure in the final electoral roll might not protest, treating the tension and trauma during the revision process as part of the routine struggle that helpless citizens go through to secure their rights. The voice of those excluded doesn’t count in the elections in any case.

Eventually, the valid concern of protecting the right to vote turns into the lament of losers who are left with no choice but to resort to the ultimate constitutional weapon against the CEC. 

Meanwhile, the ECI has sounded the poll bugle asking players to contest against each other rather than against the referee. It is now in full control. The successful completion of the poll process will justify all its decisions. Victors will exult; losers will find reasons to complain.

What the nation would be left with will be a poll body in which the Opposition, representing more than half the voting population, has expressed no confidence.

Ashok Lavasa is former Election Commissioner and Union Finance Secretary of India