1 hr ago
India’s Election Commission Faces Dissent, Courts Hear Political Cases
Several legal and political disputes in India involve election officials and courts.
A newspaper reported that two election commissioners disagreed with decisions made by the Election Commission 14 times in 10 months.
Opposition parties said this showed that the commission was not working independently.
The Supreme Court sent a challenge to the law governing appointments to the Election Commission to a larger bench.
One judge said the law may not protect independence, while another supported referral because the issue was legally important.
In Gujarat, a court refused to temporarily release journalist Ravi Nair in a defamation case brought by Adani Enterprises Limited.
The Supreme Court also questioned why Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla had taken three months to decide petitions seeking the disqualification of 20 rebel MPs.
The court called the delay a warning sign but did not impose a deadline.
Opposition parties accused Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar of authoritarian conduct after a report said fellow commissioners objected to panel decisions 14 times in 10 months.
The Supreme Court referred challenges to the 2023 Election Commission appointments law to a larger constitutional bench after differing judicial views.
The Gujarat High Court denied interim relief to journalist Ravi Nair, who sought release from custody in a criminal defamation case filed by Adani Enterprises Limited.
The Supreme Court called the three-month delay in deciding disqualification petitions against 20 rebel Trinamool Congress MPs a “red flag” but set no deadline.
The cases involve disputes over electoral-roll revisions, Election Commission independence, defamation proceedings and delays in parliamentary disqualification decisions.
- Who
- The Election Commission of India, Opposition parties, the Supreme Court of India, journalist Ravi Nair, Adani Enterprises Limited, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla and 20 rebel Trinamool Congress MPs.
- What
- Reports and court proceedings concerned alleged dissent within the Election Commission, challenges to its appointment law, Nair’s detention in a defamation case and delayed disqualification petitions.
- Where
- The matters involved the Election Commission of India, the Supreme Court of India, the Gujarat High Court and the Lok Sabha in India.
- When
- The Election Commission objections reportedly occurred over 10 months; Nair was detained on September 17; his cited posts were published between October 2020 and July 2021; the Speaker’s decision had been pending for three months.
- Why
- The disputes concern the independence and decisions of election authorities, alleged defamation, and the handling of parliamentary disqualification petitions.
Critics and Petitioners
Government and Respondents
Election Commission independence
Critics and Petitioners
The Congress and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav said the reported objections and decisions showed serious damage to democratic institutions; the Congress accused Gyanesh Kumar and Prime Minister Narendra Modi of contributing to that damage.
Government and Respondents
The report and court proceedings record the dispute, but the supplied articles do not provide a detailed public response from Gyanesh Kumar or Prime Minister Narendra Modi to these accusations.
Election Commission appointments law
Critics and Petitioners
Justice Dipankar Datta said the 2023 law did not appear to ensure an independent selection process and questioned whether a prime ministerial nominee could defy the prime minister.
Government and Respondents
Justice Satish Chandra Sharma disagreed with those observations and said the matter should be referred because it involved a substantial question of law.
Delay in MP disqualification decisions
Critics and Petitioners
The Supreme Court described the three-month delay by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla as a “red flag” and said an expeditious decision was expected.
Government and Respondents
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Speaker, said there had been no undue delay and noted that notices were issued to the rebel MPs in August.
Key facts
- Reported Election Commission objections
- Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi reportedly objected to panel decisions 14 times in 10 months.
- Issues in the objections
- The report cited voter registration, deletions and restorations, appeals against inclusion, and electoral-roll custody and security.
- Appointment-law challenge
- The Supreme Court referred petitions challenging the constitutionality of the 2023 law governing Election Commission appointments to a larger bench.
- Ravi Nair custody
- The Gujarat High Court declined interim relief after Nair sought release from judicial custody in a criminal defamation case.
- Defamation complainant
- The case was filed by Adani Enterprises Limited over social media posts published between October 2020 and July 2021.
- Disqualification petitions
- The Supreme Court said three months taken to decide petitions against 20 rebel Trinamool Congress MPs was a “red flag,” but imposed no deadline.
Quotes
Justice Dipankar Datta
Supreme Court justice who questioned the independence of the Election Commission appointments law
“does not appear to ensure an independent selection process”
scroll.in
Sources
Related news
Opposition Demands Gyanesh Kumar’s Removal Over SIR Objections
Election Commission Says SIR Decisions Were Unanimous Despite Objections
Election Commissioners Raise 14 Objections Over SIR Decisions
Lawyers Allege Election Commission Rot Amid SIR Dispute
Maharashtra Opposition Demands Action Over Election Roll Revision
Election Commission Says SIR Decisions Were Unanimous After Rift Report
Supreme Court Flags Delay in Rebel TMC MPs’ Disqualification
Justice Datta Defends Collegium, Criticises Centre’s Selective Approvals
Supreme Court to hear Medha Roopam’s compensation challenge
SIT Flags 105 Unauthorised Currency Removals at Ayodhya Ram Temple
