Should former CECs stand for elections?

Ashwani Kumar,
Rajya Sabha member,
Convenor of the Congress party's Vichar Vibhag

---

It would be a flawed understanding of both political conventions and the scheme of our constitutional democracy to suggest that while other former civil servants can offer themselves for an elective position as members of Parliament or of the legislature, the same right ought not to be available to the election commissioners (ECs) on the ground that they are in close involvement with political parties when exercising their political duties.

The democratic powers of the ultimate sovereign, that is, the people of India, are broken into three links of government by a constitutional mandate, which again owes its origins to the will of the people. All executive functionaries under the Union and in the states exercise, in every sense, a part of the political power delegated to them by the political executive. This political power is ultimately to be found in the outcome of the electoral process, which is directly connected with the functioning of political parties.

Thus, the logic involved to deny to the ECs the right to an elective office could likewise be stretched to all civil servants including ex-principal secretaries, the former comptroller and auditor generals, former police commissioners and ex-servicemen.

In a democracy such as ours, the army functions in aid of and under command of the political executive and the civil administration. The judiciary is an impartial arbiter of the division of political power and drives forward the harmonious exercise of political power by three different wings of the government.

Therefore, on the first principles of both the democratic and political rights of citizens to hold elective office, and in view of the scheme of our constitutional governance, there can be no bar for either the ECs or the chief election commissioners (CECs) to accept a political party's offer of being fielded as a candidate to either house of Parliament or the state legislature.

Merely because the ECs implement the statutory provisions and their constitutional duty to ensure a vibrant democracy through regulation of political parties and activities, they cannot in their post-retirement state be denied equality of opportunity to hold a legislative post.

In the current case of M S Gill, who became CEC soon after serving the Government of India as secretary, I cannot think of a single law we have violated or any impropriety we have committed.

Not only did Gill opt to join politics after retirement, he also decided to join it after the mandatory two-year cool-off period prescribed for civil servants. Three years have passed since Gill retired. He cannot be expected to stay at home and lead a permanently-retired life, simply because he served the Government of India at some point in his life.

On the contrary, by virtue of their understanding of pre-poll processes, those involved in the work of the Election Commission may, in some ways, be better equipped to perform their duties as legislators or parliamentarians.

Of course if, in an individual case, the nomination of an EC to an elective post by a political party follows immediately after a particular decision handed by the said constitutional functionary, so as to give an impression or raise a popular perception of a quid pro quo, such nomination could be validly questioned on grounds of constitutional propriety.

In any case, for a healthy functioning of our democracy, high constitutional functionaries are expected to so conduct themselves while in office and thereafter, so as not to give cause to anyone to question their probity and political integrity.

Caesar's wife must always be above suspicion and therefore, individual aberrations, if any, alone can be questioned. In my view, there is no case, either in terms of constitutional convention or on the touchstone of political morality to find fault with the election of Gill to the Rajya Sabha on the Congress ticket.

(As told to Aditi Phadnis)

Mukhtar Abbas Naquvi,
General Secretary,
Bharatiya Janata Party

---

Let me clarify at the very outset of this debate that we are confining ourselves to discuss the high values and propriety in public life. I am aware of the fact that the Constitution guarantees freedom to everyone, including those occupying high positions in the government, to take part in elections after their retirement. But what is at stake is a larger issue of propriety and values in politics.

When a retired chief election commissioner (CEC) files his nomination papers as the candidate of a certain political party, soon after demitting office, it raises serious doubts about his impartial functioning. There will be reasons for people to raise doubts about certain decisions of the election commissioner (EC) and interpret them politically even if these decision were taken with the best of intentions.

This is a trend that will gradually have a larger impact on the country's politics. I am referring particularly to retired CECs in view of the fact that T N Seshan contested the Lok Sabha election from Ahmedabad against L K Advani in 1999. Similarly, the Congress has again decided to put an ex-CEC, M S Gill, as a candidate in the forthcoming elections. We in the BJP were concerned with this trend that questions the credibility of an institution like the Election Commission.

In Indian democracy, the Election Commission has a greater role to play as this is an institution that regularly interacts with political parties and is assigned the task of conducting elections in a free and fair manner. The BJP is worried over the prospect of accusing fingers being pointed at the commission.

We discussed the issue in various party forums when Seshan contested the polls after his retirement. The BJP leadership held the view that a political consensus must be arrived at to check the trend. But Gill's candidature as a member of the Congress party strengthened our resolve that the BJP will never field any CEC as the party's candidate now or in the future. BJP President M Venkaiah Naidu declared this in as many words publicly. Now it is high time other parties follow suit.

Having said this, I would like to clarify that our stance on the issue does not cast doubt on the ability, sincerity and integrity of the ex-CECs who took to politics. Seshan and Gill were outstanding CECs and have done a lot to strengthen the Indian democracy. What we are discussing is related to the institution, and not individuals. As an institution, the Election Commission's credibility is a much larger issue for the BJP and the CEC has to be Caesar's wife.

Although the BJP has taken a conscious decision to not field any ex-CEC in the future, we intend to extend this debate to other higher constitutional positions such as judges of the Supreme Court and governors. In the BJP, there is unanimity that people occupying such positions must not associate themselves with the electoral politics as it could send out the wrong signals.

There are instances when retired judges of the high courts have been inducted by the BJP. But let the issue be discussed in totality by all parties in order to arrive at a consensus. However, the BJP is in strong favour of keeping all these offices above party politics.

We are worried at the manner in which the Congress has been throwing all established democratic values and norms to the winds in order to make short-term gains. This is the kind of politics that is driven by myopia. In the long term, it will have a sinister impact on healthy democratic principles.

This is the precise reason for the BJP to raise the issue and set an example by declaring that the party will never do anything like the Congress did to compromise the credibility of the CEC. Let there be some constitutional posts away from politics and make them a shining example of India's vibrant democracy. Obviously, the BJP is committed to this goal. Will the Congress explain its position?

(As told to Ajay Singh)