This refers to your editorial ‘For an impartial Commission’, February 2. Integrity and impartiality of the Election Commission are the basic requirement for electoral democracy. It has been rightly pointed out that the original sin was the appointment to the Commission of people who are widely believed to have political alignments. Navin Chawla’s name has been associated with the Gandhis (first Sanjay and then Rajiv/Sonia) since the days of the emergency. He was identified as a Congress loyalist and his appointment in the Election Commission was largely seen as a strategic move by the Congress with an eye on the 2009 Lok Sabha elections as the term of the present Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) was to end on April 20. Chawla was all set to take over as the CEC before the Lok Sabha elections. Naturally the BJP had apprehensions about Chawla’s impartiality and had been opposing his appointment since the very beginning.
What is at stake does not pertain to an individual or a party — it is the integrity and impartiality of the institution of the Election Commission that is at stake. After having become the centre of the controversy, Chawla should either step down or the government should at least ask him to proceed on long leave till the completion of the Lok Sabha elections. As the CEC, many of his poll-decisions will certainly be questioned and contested by the Opposition, raising unwarranted controversies and ultimately, adversely affecting the probity of the electoral process. In the long run, your suggestion for creating a bipartisan method for appointing election commissioners, with the prime minister and the leader of the opposition, along with the vice-president agreeing on nominations is the right solution to the problem.
M C Joshi, Lucknow
Readers should write to:
The Editor, Business Standard,
Nehru House,
4, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi 110 002,
Fax: (011) 23720201;
letters@bsmail.in
