Independence of EC destroyed by all govts, says SC

NEW DELHI: Successive governments have “completely destroyed” the independence of the Election Commission of India (ECI) by ensuring no chief election commissioner (CEC) gets the full six-year term to head the poll body since 1996, a Constitution bench in the Supreme Court lamented on Tuesday, adding that absence of a law for appointment of election commissioners (ECS) has resulted in an “alarming trend”.

The five-judge bench further remarked that the silence of the Constitution on how to pick CEC and election commissioners (ECS) has been exploited by political parties of all colours, giving rise to concerns if those appointed are expected to do the bidding of the dispensation at the relevant time.

“It’s a very, very disturbing trend. After TN Seshan (who was CEC for six years between 1990 and 1996), the slide began when no person has been given a full term. What the government has been doing is that because it knows the date of birth, it ensures that anyone who is appointed as the CEC does not get his full six years... Be it the UPA (Congress-led United Progressive Alliance) government or this government, this has been a trend,” said the bench led by justice KM Joseph.

It added: “In this way, the so-called independence, which is just a lip-service, is completely destroyed... Particularly in view of the disturbing trend that we have found... nobody can question them since there is no check. This is how the silences of the Constitution can be exploited. There is no law, no check. Everyone has used it to their interest... Pick up someone and give him a highly truncated tenure. He is obligated; does your bidding... we are not saying so but it looks like that.”

The top court’s strong observations on the absence of a law or regulations have come close on the heels of criticism by the government of the apex court’s own model of selecting judges for constitutional courts. Earlier this month, Union law minister Kiren Rijiju commented that the Supreme Court collegium appoints people who are known to the judges and appear before them. At different occasions in the last one month, Rijiju has termed the collegium system “opaque”, and described the Indian selection system as the only one where judges appoint judges.