Font size:
Print
EC’s election rule amendment
Context:
The Centre on December 20 amended the Conduct of Election Rules to restrict access for the public to a section of poll documents. This was done by the Union Law Ministry following a recommendation from the Election Commission (EC).
Amendment to Rule 93(2)(a): Key Changes:
- Before the Amendment: Rule 93(2)(a) stated: “All other papers relating to the election shall be open to public inspection.”
- After the Amendment: The rule now reads: “All other papers as specified in these rules relating to the election shall be open to public inspection.”
- This amendment introduces a specific limitation, restricting public access to only those documents explicitly mentioned in the rules.
Context Behind the Amendment:
- High Court Directive:
The Conduct of Election Rules, 1961: An Overview
The Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, provides a procedural framework for conducting elections under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. These rules ensure the transparency, fairness, and integrity of the electoral process by covering:
- Filing and scrutiny of nominations
- Maintenance and inspection of electoral rolls
- Polling procedures
- Counting of votes
- Resolution of election disputes
- The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently directed the EC to share all election-related documents, including CCTV footage, under Rule 93(2).
- This prompted the EC to clarify ambiguities in the rule and exclude sensitive electronic records.
- Access for Candidates
- The EC maintains that candidates already have access to necessary election-related documents from their constituencies.
Rationale Behind the Amendment: Election Commission’s Justification
- Protection of Sensitive Data: The Election Commission (EC) argues that unrestricted public access could compromise the security and sanctity of digital records, including:
- Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs)
- Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) data
- Clarification of Ambiguities: The EC claims the amendment resolves ambiguities regarding whether electronic records such as CCTV footage fall under the category of “election papers.”
- Secrecy of the Vote: Protecting voter privacy remains paramount to ensure the secrecy of the ballot.
- Misuse of CCTV Footage: Concerns about potential misuse of CCTV footage, especially in sensitive areas like Jammu & Kashmir and Naxal-affected regions, prompted the EC to recommend this change.
Criticisms of the Amendment:
- Impact on Transparency:
- Critics argue the amendment restricts public scrutiny of critical election documents, undermining accountability.
- Activists liken Rule 93 to the Right to Information (RTI) Act for elections, asserting that its narrowing undermines democratic transparency.
- Infringement on RTI
Transparency Activists’ Concerns:
- Diminished Public Scrutiny
- Activists fear restricted access to election documents such as:
- Reports by Election Observers
- Scrutiny reports from Returning Officers
- Index Cards with election statistics
- Presiding Officers’ diaries
- Repercussions for Election Fairness
- Reduced access to these records impedes the ability to independently verify election integrity and detect irregularities.
- Limiting access to documents could weaken citizens’ rights to seek information under the RTI Act.
- Restricted access impedes independent assessments of electoral fairness.
- Risk to Electoral Integrity
- Opponents argue reduced oversight may lead to undetected discrepancies or irregularities in the electoral process.
Opposition’s Criticism:
- Allegations Against the EC
- Opposition leaders claim the amendment undermines electoral integrity and erodes public trust.
- Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge described it as a “systematic conspiracy to destroy the EC’s institutional integrity.”
- Legal Action: The Congress Party has filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the amendment.
- Lack of Consultation: Critics allege the EC made unilateral decisions without consulting political parties, weakening multi-party democracy.
Broader Implications:
- Erosion of Public Trust: Limiting access to election documents may reduce public confidence in the electoral system’s transparency and impartiality.
- Legal Challenges: Activists and opposition parties are likely to pursue further legal recourse to contest the amendment.
- Precedent for Future Restrictions: Critics fear this change could pave the way for additional limitations on public access to critical government documents.
