Author: Swapan Dasgupta
Publication: The Free Press Journal
Date: May 3, 2004
URL: http://www.samachar.com/features/030504-features.html
Before the first round of voting
in the general election, President A. P. J. Abdul Kalam broadcast to the
nation a very simple but heartening message: please vote in large numbers
and vote positively for the candidate or party of your choice. It was heartening
message and quite contrary to the cynicism that the media tries so hard
to inject into the national bloodstream. In his own very distinctive way
the President tried reintroduce some of the ordinary decencies which we
seem so anxious to abandon our quest for cosmopolitan sophistication. For
an adult Indian to vote requires his or her name featuring in the electoral
rolls. This, you would assume, is a fairly routine matter. Not so in India.
As reports of the first round of polling trickled in from the districts,
one thing was painfully clear: the electoral rolls are in a mess.
From Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh,
states where the government machinery is fairly intact, came reports of
large-scale deletion of voters' names from the rolls. The scale of deletion
was particularly large in Andhra Pradesh. According to a report in the
Hyderabad-based Deccan Chronicle, 19.9 per cent of voters had their names
deleted in Prakasam district. The percentage deletion in other districts
was: Guntur 13.2 per cent, Srikakulam 11.2 per cent, Nellore 10.5 per cent,
Medak 10.9 per cent, Vizag 4.5 per cent, Ranga Reddy 2.9 per cent and Hyderabad
2.8 per cent. In short, lakhs of Indians were forcibly disenfranchised.
The scale of bungling is monumental
and is a national scandal. In Gujarat, two of our cricketing heroes, Parthiv
Patel in Ahmedabad and Irfan Pathan in Vadodara, found their names left
out of the electoral rolls. Yet, have we heard one contrite statement from
Nirvachan Sadan? Instead, the Election Commission has been quick to brush
aside angry protests from both the Telugu Desam and the Congress.
In Bangalore, the State Election
Commission conveniently put the blame on politicians suggesting they should
have alerted the EC earlier. Is that a credible justification? If political
parties have lost grassroots contact, should ordinary voters be penalised?
In any case, responsibility for
the electoral rolls rests with the EC and not with the State or Central
governments. What is surprising is that the incompetence and ineptitude
of the EC has not attracted more indignation. Political parties are understandably
loath to make too much fuss because of a fear that the EC, comprising superannuated
bureaucrats who don't like politicians top begin with, will turn vengeful
and start issuing unnecessary show-cause notices. But why was the media
silent? Is it because the nuts and bolts of democracy don't interest a
media that is primarily concerned with fuelling mass disinterest?
But the onus of ensuring free and
fair elections rests with the EC. That is why it has been conferred exceptional
powers. Unfortunately, in the guise of preserving the independence of the
EC, we have ended up creating an unaccountable monster. The EC is running
completely amok. Its main task is to ensure a free and fair poll and it
has been empowered by both the Constitution and the courts to do what is
necessary to ensure the sanctity of democracy. What is necessary to be
done depends on a combination of administrative rigour and good sense.
It is the latter commodity that seems to be absent from Nirvachan Sadan.
The EC's priorities, it would seem,
are quite warped. In this election, for example, the EC has decided that
India Shining is illegitimate. I am not talking about some advertisements
issued by government departments. I am referring to its strictures against
the finance ministry for releasing details of improvements in direct tax
collections. How do such statistics hamper free and fair elections?
Conversely, why is it the EC's business
to demand petrol and diesel prices be raised? The rationale behind the
EC's recent interventions is utterly bewildering. At this rate, I would
not be surprised if the EC takes it upon itself to find out the great mystery
behind Rahul Gandhi's Cambridge degree. How, did he secure a M.Phil when,
by his own admission to the Returning Officer, he does not possess a BA
degree? Of course, because it is Rahul Gandhi, the EC will be a bit circumspect.
Otherwise, its natural inclination is to pry into matters that have no
bearing on the conduct of the polls.
The EC would love to play God for
the period the code of conduct is in force. It would even love to set the
ideological agenda. Its members derive a perverse satisfaction in getting
their own back on politicians they spent a lifetime kowtowing to. They
also bask in the glare of publicity so much so that many of their actions
are dictated by the TV cameras. In the process, the EC has forgotten why
it is there in the first place. With turnout down, thanks to the inconsiderate
choice of polling dates, and lakhs of people disenfranchised becauuse no
one gave a damn, it is time Nirvachan Sadan was exposed to a post-poll
audit. The conclusions, I am afraid, will be deeply unflattering.
A possible remedy could be an addition
to the code of conduct which would bar the three- member EC from speaking
to the media and posing for the cameras. This would give them the time
to get on with their real but unglamorous job. Denying the EC the oxygen
of self-publicity will be good for democracy.