As Keepers of an Electoral Zoo, EC in Bengal Must Wield the Stick

Three former CECs The Quint spoke to acknowledged malaise inflicting the Election Commission, writes Chandan Nandy.

(Photo: The Quint)

Instances of sporadic violence in West Bengal, where elections are still underway, has cast a shadow over the Election Commission’s ability to conduct free and fair polls. In a state where political parties have historically displayed uncontrolled application of force with all its bloody consequences, this is alarming.

Thousands of complaints have – so far, four of the six-phase polling have been conducted in the heat and dust of this grueling summer – been submitted to the EC by opposition parties. Admittedly, some of these complaints are frivolous while a bulk of them reflected genuine concern over the ruling Trinamool Congress’ predatory tactics to beat the opposition out of the electoral contest.

When Bihar, once the biggest problem child among India’s states, went to the polls in October-November last year, the EC’s organisation and management of elections there was flawless to a fault. When Assam’s two-phased assembly polls (April 4 and 11) could be conducted with a fair degree of institutional control, including commendable security measures, Bengal’s case is at once bewildering and questionable.

Casual Approach

It is bewildering because despite the state’s sordid history of political violence, the EC’s approach this time, under the leadership of Chief Election Commissioner Syed Nasim Zaidi, has been cavalier.

Instead of taking proactive steps to professionally manage and commandeer a free-and-fair election in Bengal, Zaidi’s team, which enjoys considerable autonomy of action, behaved ostrich-like, emboldening musclemen and trouble-makers in and around election booths. Amidst widespread allegations of the dance of ghostly figures (read TMC workers) in and around polling booths, the EC failed to impose order as the ojha (exorcist).

The EC relied too heavily on the state’s Chief Electoral Officer Sunil Kumar Gupta, a West Bengal cadre officer whose actions and observations, or the lack of them, indicated bias towards the ruling party. It took several blow-hot, blow-cold moments before the EC took belated action against Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar, holding him responsible for a ham-handed Special Branch operation that tried snooping on state BJP leader Rahul Sinha.

People queue up to cast their votes at a polling booth during the fourth phase of West Bengal Legislative Assembly polls in Kolkata, on April 25, 2016. (Photo: Kuntal Chakrabarty/IANS)

Crumbling Authority

As the first two sub-phases (April 4 and 11) of polling in western Bengal – marked by moderate violence and high levels of voter intimidation and electoral malpractices – showed, the EC, which, since the time of the volatile but effective T N Seshan, had built a formidable reputation of itself as a no-nonsense institution, crumbled.

It was unable to act decisively, leave alone send a strong message to the political parties that it had zero tolerance for not only violence but electoral malpractices characteristic of Bengal. Besides, the deployment of central forces was unimaginative, giving rise to allegations that the EC had not done its homework thoroughly enough.

Three former CECs The Quint spoke to refused to write articles on the institution on the plea that their comments would “go against” the successors. In other words, it was an acknowledgement that all is not well with an institution that they had so assiduously built and contributed to its independence. One of the three illustrious CECs bemoaned the eroding standards of leadership.

Chief Election Commissioner of India Nasim Zaidi addresses a press conference in Kolkata, on April 14, 2016. (Photo: Kuntal Chakrabarty/IANS)

Facilitating Greater Participation

At a time of heightened mobilisation and party competition and when voter participation has risen dramatically across the country – a reflection of the trust and faith that the Indian electorate has reposed in the EC – it is incumbent upon the poll panel to take all measures to not just respect that trust but to deepen it. As an autonomous institution, the EC’s main task is to accomplish one of the central ideals of democratic politics – facilitating active political participation and involvement of citizens in regular, competitive elections.

While admittedly the EC has, over the years, ensured greater people’s participation in elections, especially when the tenor of national politics has changed over the last two decades, it is the weaknesses as exposed in its conduct of elections in Bengal, that have earned the poll panel a bad name. Whether the EC’s fiasco in Bengal is the result of lack of consensus among the three election commissioners will never be fully known.

EC Under the Scanner

• EC’s integrity being questioned during Bengal polls, especially its reliance on Chief Electoral Officer Sunil Kumar Gupta, a West Bengal cadre officer.
  
• Three CECs The Quint spoke to acknowledged all is not well with the institution that they had so assiduously built.
  
• Whether the fiasco in Bengal is the result of a lack of consensus among the three election commissioners will never be fully known.
  
• EC’s famed efficiency has come under question, leaving it open to not just legitimate criticism but potential long-term erosion of public trust.
  

Strengthening Governance

But what is known is that as an institution of democracy the EC has floundered at a time when public interest and civil society groups across the country in general and West Bengal in particular have proliferated and have, in their own modest ways, served to protect citizens’ democratic right to vote freely and fearlessly. While these are heartening transformations in an ever-deepening inclusive and pluralist polity, and especially when voting rates have gone up steadily, the weakening of institutional governance cannot be overlooked.

When social and political dynamics are closely intertwined with the health of democracy, the EC’s less-than-professional conduct of elections in Bengal could well spell its doom. Its famed efficiency has come under question, leaving it open to not just legitimate criticism but potential long-term erosion of public trust when foolproof policies, robust development of bylaws and efficient administration of the electoral machinery should promote effective institution building and wider participatory democracy.

Also read:

Bengal’s Violent Electoral Politics – No Badalav but Lot of Badlaa

Salt Lake Votes Peacefully, After Violent 2015 Municipal Election