Question

Picking the watchdog

Court verdict on manner of choosing poll panel is a boost to its independence

The Supreme Court verdict taking away the power to appoint members of the Election Commission of India (ECI) from the sole domain of the executive is a major boost to the independence of the election watchdog. The Court has ruled that a three-member committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, or the leader of the single largest Opposition party, and the Chief Justice of India (CJI), will choose the CEC and ECs until a law in passed. As a constitutional body vested with plenary powers of superintendence, direction and control over elections, the ECI is a vital component of the republic that requires functional freedom and constitutional protection to ensure free and fair elections. It has been the practice that the President appoints the CEC and ECs on the advice of the Prime Minister, but the Constitution Bench has pointed out that the original intent of the Constitution makers was that the manner of appointment should be laid down in a parliamentary law. Article 324 says the President should appoint the CEC and Commissioners, subject to any law made in that behalf by Parliament. However, successive regimes have failed to enact a law. Justice K.M. Joseph, who has authored the main verdict, has based the Court’s decision on “the inertia” of the legislature and the perceived vacuum in the absence of a law.

Few would disagree with the Court’s fundamental proposition that the election watchdog should be fiercely independent and not be beholden to the executive; and there should be no room for an appointing authority to expect reciprocity or loyalty. The government’s argument that the existing system was working well and there was no vacuum was quite weak, as, admittedly, the convention now is that the Prime Minister chooses a name from among a database of high-ranking civil servants and advises the President to make the appointment. However, a relevant question is whether the presence of the CJI in the selection panel is the only way in which an institution’s independence can be preserved. There is no clear proof that the independence of the CBI director, who is appointed by a panel that includes the CJI, or his nominee, has been preserved or enhanced. Further, the CJI’s presence may give pre-emptive legitimacy to all appointments and affect objective judicial scrutiny of any error or infirmity in the process. On its part, the government will be well-advised to enact a law — but not one that seeks to preserve the current convention to get around the verdict — that is in tune with the spirit of the Court’s emphasis on the ECI’s independence.

Answer 1

The recent Supreme Court verdict on the appointment of members to the Election Commission of India (ECI) is being seen as a major boost to the independence of the election watchdog. The Court has ruled that a three-member committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha or the leader of the single largest Opposition party, and the Chief Justice of India (CJI), will choose the CEC and ECs until a law is passed. The Court's decision is based on the "inertia" of the legislature and the perceived vacuum in the absence of a law.

The Court's fundamental proposition is that the election watchdog should be fiercely independent and not beholden to the executive. The government's argument that the existing system was working well and there was no vacuum was weak, as the convention now is that the Prime Minister chooses a name from among a database of high-ranking civil servants and advises the President to make the appointment.

However, the presence of the CJI in the selection panel is not the only way in which an institution's independence can be preserved. There is no clear proof that the independence of the CBI director, who is appointed by a panel that includes the CJI, or his nominee, has been preserved or enhanced. Further, the CJI's presence may give pre-emptive legitimacy to all appointments and affect objective judicial scrutiny of any error or infirmity in the process.

In conclusion, the government should enact a law that is in tune with the spirit of the Court's emphasis on the ECI's independence. This is a positive step towards ensuring free and fair elections in India.

Answer 2

Who appoints the members of the Election Commission of India (ECI) according to the Constitution of India?

a) The Prime Minister

b) The President

c) The Chief Justice of India

d) The Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha

What was the Supreme Court verdict on the appointment of members of the ECI?

a) The executive will continue to have sole power to appoint members of the ECI

b) A three-member committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India, and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha will choose the CEC and ECs until a law is passed

c) The President will appoint the CEC and Commissioners on the advice of the Prime Minister

d) The CJI will appoint the members of the ECI

Why did the Supreme Court rule in favor of a three-member committee to appoint the CEC and ECs?

a) Because the existing system was working well

b) Because the Constitution makers intended for the manner of appointment to be laid down in a parliamentary law

c) Because the Prime Minister and the President were not competent enough to make the appointment

d) Because the CJI was the only authority that could preserve the independence of the ECI

Why is the independence of the ECI important?

a) To ensure that elections are free and fair

b) To maintain the integrity of the Republic

c) To prevent the appointing authority from expecting loyalty or reciprocity

d) All of the above

How can the independence of an institution be preserved according to the article?

a) By having a three-member committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India, and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha

b) By having a law made in that behalf by Parliament

c) By having the CJI present during the appointment process

d) By having a database of high-ranking civil servants to choose from

Comments

Answers:

b) The President

b) A three-member committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India, and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha will choose the CEC and ECs until a law is passed

b) Because the Constitution makers intended for the manner of appointment to be laid down in a parliamentary law

d) All of the above

b) By having a law made in that behalf by Parliament