The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notices to the Union government and the Election Commission of India (ECI) in response to a petition filed by Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh, challenging recent amendments to the Conduct of Election Rules. The petition raises concerns about the impact of these amendments on transparency and accountability in the electoral process.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar scheduled the next hearing in the case for the week beginning March 17. Representing Ramesh, senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi described the amendments as a “clever” attempt to limit access to crucial election-related materials. Singhvi argued that the government’s justification claiming that revealing such information might disclose voter identities and preferences was flawed and misleading.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, also representing Ramesh, highlighted the significance of Forms 17A and 17C under the Conduct of Election Rules. These forms, which record details about the number of electors and votes polled, are critical to maintaining electoral transparency.
The amendments in question pertain to Rule 93(2)(a) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, which was revised in December by the Union law ministry on the ECI’s recommendation. The changes restrict public access to certain electronic materials, including CCTV footage, webcasting videos, and candidate recordings, citing concerns over potential misuse. Critics, however, argue that these restrictions shield important information from public scrutiny, thereby compromising transparency.
Questioned Electoral Integrity
Jairam Ramesh has been vocal about his opposition to the amendments. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), he described the move as a setback to electoral integrity, criticizing the lack of public consultation before its implementation. According to Ramesh, the ECI, tasked with ensuring free and fair elections, should not have the authority to unilaterally enforce such significant changes.
The petition emphasizes that the amendments undermine the democratic principles of transparency and accountability. It argues that limiting access to crucial electoral materials could erode public trust in the electoral process and compromise the fairness of elections.
The government has defended the amendments, stating that restricting access to such materials is necessary to prevent their misuse. However, Ramesh and his legal team contend that these changes represent a troubling departure from the principles of democratic oversight. The Supreme Court’s decision on the matter will be closely watched, as it could have far-reaching implications for the transparency and accountability of India’s electoral processes.
