- The Indian democracy is renowned worldwide and duly acknowledged for being the most vibrant, throbbing, thriving, and functional despite being chaotic at the best of times. Yes, that’s the nature of any truly democratic country whose fundamental existence is derived from the sound Constitutional support mandated as the rights of the citizens. The democracy or the Constitution doesn’t differentiate between class, creed, caste, religion ethnicity, and language but extends the rights to every citizen equally. As you are aware, the guardian of the Constitution is the Supreme Court whose mandate is to interpret laws passed by the legislature for the welfare of the citizens.
PC: NewsClick
- Note that for any democratic country to flourish, the conduct of elections in a fair, impartial, and peaceful manner becomes incumbent. This is where the Election Commission of India has passed the litmus test with flying colors in ensuring the polls are conducted meticulously and that no untoward incidents occur that would question the integrity of the whole process itself over the decades. However, what transpired in the Jan 30 Chandigarh municipal corporation’s mayoral election is simply unacceptable. Mind you, the ECI had no role to play in this poll. Thankfully, SC recently set aside the result by declaring AAP’s candidate as the winner in place of BJP’s. The apex court did the right thing for sure.
- Of course, its judgment is a much-needed reminder that the integrity of elections is what builds trust in a democracy. SC invoked the Constitution’s Article 142 to underpin its verdict. This clause allows it to pass an order that will ensure complete justice. It signals the seriousness with which the court viewed the situation. Once evidence of the presiding officer’s measures to rig the election surfaced, questions on reelection came up. SC rightly turned down that argument because a physical examination of ballot papers suggested otherwise. The municipal corporation has regulations that lay out conditions under which a ballot paper is invalid. Not one of those conditions was met. Therefore, the electoral process didn’t have a problem.
PC: Fair Observer
- Mind you, the presiding officer’s action at the counting stage contaminated the result. He not only tried to rig the result but also misled the court. SC initiated criminal proceedings against him. Undoubtedly, there should be consequences for tampering with the results of an election. Absent that, there’s no deterrence. Indeed, quick action by SC saved the day. In electoral malpractice cases, justice delayed is emphatically justice denied. Since municipal poll didn’t come under the purview of EC, it was important SC wrapped up this case quickly. All officials, from the police or administration, who will be working for EC during general elections, will now know even more that fairness is non-negotiable. The message has gone out loud and clear.
