A constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday, 2 March, ruled that the appointment of the Election Commissioners will be carried out on the advice of a committee comprising the Prime Minister, and leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha (or leader of largest opposition party), and the Chief Justice of India.
The court added that the practice will be in force until a law is made in this regard by the Parliament.
A bench of Justices KM Joseph, Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy and CT Ravikumar were hearing a batch of petitions seeking reform in the process of the appointment of Election Commissioner of India.
What else did the apex court say?
“This law will continue to hold good until a law is made by Parliament. Court asks the government to make a necessary change with regard to funding of ECI from the Consolidated Fund of India and need for separate Secretariat."Supreme Court of India
But why? The apex court was of the firm view that the election commission must remain “aloof” from subjugation by the executive.
“A vulnerable Election Commission would result in an insidious situation and detract from its efficient functioning,” the bench added.
The apex court also maintained that a Democracy can be successful only when all stakeholders work to maintain the purity of the election process in order to reflect the will of the people. It did, however, lament the impartiality of present-day media, reportedly saying:
"A large section of the media has abdicated its role and become partisan.”
(With inputs from Livelaw and Bar and Bench.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)