Font size:
Print
SC to hear Validity of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (EC) Appointment Law
Context:
The Supreme Court is set to hear petitions challenging the validity of the 2023 law governing the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) . The matter has gained urgency as incumbent CEC Rajiv Kumar is scheduled to retire on February 18, 2025.
Background: The 2023 Law and its Provisions
- The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service, and Term of Office) Act, 2023 was enacted in December 2023.
- Under Section 7(1) of this Act:
- The President appoints the CEC and ECs based on the recommendation of a Selection Committee.
- This committee consists of the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and a Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister.
- Chief Justice of India (CJI) is excluded from the selection process, which was previously mandated by a March 2023 Supreme Court verdict.
Key Issues Raised in the Petition
- Potential Executive Overreach
- The removal of the CJI from the selection panel allegedly gives the executive excessive influence over EC appointments.
- This could undermine the independence of the Election Commission, affecting free and fair elections.
- Conflict with Supreme Court Verdict
- In March 2023 (Anoop Baranwal Case), the Supreme Court directed that appointments be made by a committee including the CJI to ensure an independent selection process.
- Petitioners argue that the 2023 Act circumvents this ruling, which could set a dangerous precedent.
- Constitutional Question on Legislative Powers
- The key legal debate is whether Parliament has the authority to nullify or dilute a Constitution Bench judgment through legislation.
- Article 141 of the Constitution states that Supreme Court decisions are binding on all courts, raising questions about whether legislative actions can override them.
Supreme Court’s Observations
- The Court remarked that the case represents a clash between legislative powers and the Supreme Court’s authority.
- The court has not granted an interim stay on the law but stated that consequences will follow based on its decision.
- Earlier, in March 2024, the court had refused to halt the appointments of ECs Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Sandhu, made under the 2023 Act.
Arguments by the Petitioners
- NGOs like Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and activists such as Jaya Thakur argue that the new law is a threat to electoral democracy.
- They contend that an independent selection process is crucial to maintain the neutrality of the Election Commission.
- The exclusion of the CJI raises concerns about potential political influence in the appointment process.
Government’s Defense
- The Union Government, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, argues that:
- The Supreme Court had earlier ruled that its 2023 judgment would be valid only until Parliament enacts a law.
- Parliament has now exercised its legislative power by enacting the 2023 Act, thereby establishing a new statutory framework.
- The law ensures a balance between democratic accountability and institutional independence.
Possible Implications of the Verdict
- If the Law is Upheld
- The executive’s role in EC appointments will remain dominant.
- Could establish a precedent allowing Parliament to override Supreme Court judgments via legislation.
- Might lead to concerns over the independence of the Election Commission.
- If the Law is Struck Down
- The previous system of including the CJI in the selection panel will be reinstated.
- Strengthen judicial oversight over executive actions.
- Reinforce the doctrine of separation of powers and checks and balances.
Conclusion
- The Supreme Court’s ruling will have far-reaching consequences on the autonomy of constitutional institutions.
- The case raises critical questions on the balance of power between the executive, legislature, and judiciary.
- A decision favouring independent selection could reinforce electoral integrity, while a decision upholding the law may shift power towards the executive in constitutional appointments.
- The hearing will be pivotal in determining the future of democratic governance and electoral processes in India.
