Sanctity of public office

The desire to cling to office indefinitely, while disregarding transparency, accountability, the Constitution and the law, appears to have become the new norm in India. The values of humility, transparency and accountability in public life seem to have become things of the past, especially under the government of the day. Its top leader may have many achievements to his name, but he has also encouraged an office-centric political culture within the BJP and among those joining it from other parties. The priority appears to be retaining office rather than upholding the sanctity of constitutional democracy. Leader of the Opposition (Lok Sabha) Rahul Gandhi has urged Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar to resign (Page 1, September 25). Why should Mr. Kumar, when he has the backing of those at the top? The Election Commission of India’s constitutional responsibility is to ensure free and fair elections, and its decisions must command public confidence. The question is: why should constitutional institutions not function in the letter and spirit of the Constitution and the law? Holding a constitutional office means little if its occupant does not uphold the values and the responsibilities attached to it.

P.K. Sharma,

Barnala, Punjab

Resignation demand

If the Chief Election Commissioner of India quits, will all the deleted names be included in the Special Intensive Revision list? Conducting elections in a country such as India is a huge task because of its large population. In the last round of elections held in some States, the process was appreciated by many developed countries, whose representatives had said that the elections were conducted in a free and fair manner. All appreciation goes to the Election Commission of India. Demanding the resignation of hardworking people with clean hands will only affect the country.

K.V. Sundaravelu,

Bengaluru

Reports that the two Election Commissioners recorded dissent 14 times in 10 months over the CEC’s decisions deserve more than passing notice; they point to a structural problem, not merely a personality clash. Centralising electoral roll data in Delhi, bypassing constituency-level verification, and striking off names through opaque software criteria have all dented public confidence in the SIR exercise. Justice Dipankar Datta’s remark bears repeating: independence unseen is independence unproven. Parliament must revisit how the CEC and commissioners are selected, and the Supreme Court must insist on transparency in how dissent and decisions are recorded. Credibility, once lost, is slow to restore.

Gopalaswamy J.,

Chennai

The Chief Election Commissioner has unleashed a mass bureaucratic tyranny on ordinary citizens in the name of the Special Intensive Revision. Even for frivolous errors — grammar, spelling, punctuation, surname mistakes and wrong entries that originated with clerks and case workers — the elderly and the sick are being forced to stand in long queues outside local offices for hearings and verification. All relevant documents already lie with the government. The burden of determining that all is fine should therefore have rested with the Election Commission or the government itself, not with citizens who must now prove what the state already holds. Some may dismiss the present outcry as an over-reaction. In truth, many had been waiting for an opening to challenge the CEC’s autocratic style.

Rudrappa C.,

Bengaluru

For a process that has already raised many eyebrows and has repeatedly come under the scanner allegedly on account of its opaque and surreptitious nature of implementation, the series of events that have unfolded in the past few days have lend credence/genuinity to the oft-repeated allegation made by Congress leader and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi which was reiterated by him in the press conference, comes as a matter of grave concern. The manner style of functioning and the process of decision making that has been undertaken in an independent constitutional body such as the Election Commission, which strikes at the very roots of democratic style of functioning, transparency, accountability and the spirit of collective responsibility, which has endangered the basic foundation of the worlds largest democracy, is truly appalling. The shoddy implementation of the ‘SIR’ has indeed cast a shadow over the functioning of an autonomous institution such as the Election Commission, thereby severely denting its credibility. With the lack of clear elaboration of its nuances of implementation at the ground level together with the logic/reasoning adopted for this huge exercise coupled with it’s final intended outcome by the powers that be, the entire SIR process was shrouded in mystery right from its inception stage till date especially given the backdrop of the said astounding revelations. It is rightly said that ‘Eternal Vigilance is the price of Freedom’. As always in matters pertaining to public interests, where the Supreme Court has been the final beacon for deliverance of truth and justice, it fervently hoped that the top court would strike down the constitutional validity of the SIR of electoral rolls which would go a long way in restoring and infusing transparency and public accountability of the common man, in the system besides restoring the sanctity and credibility of the Election Commission.

B. Suresh Kumar,
‘

Coimbatore