SC to hear Validity of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (EC) Appointment Law

  • 0
  • 3117
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.
Share:
Print
Apply What You've Learned.
Previous Post Concerns Over Amendments to India's Nuclear Liability Laws
Next Post NIIF's $2 Billion Private Credit Fund
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x