Towards Strengthening Democracy: A Review of Electoral Reforms in India

Paper Details 

Paper Code: RP-VBCL-17-2024

Category: Research Paper

Date of Publication: April 20, 2024

Citation:  Mr. Irappa S. Medar, “Towards Strengthening Democracy: A Review of Electoral Reforms in India", 1, AIJVBCL, 266, 266-281 (2024), <https://www.vbcllawreview.com/post/towards-strengthening-democracy-a-review-of-electoral-reforms-in-india>

Author Details: Mr. Irappa S. Medar, Assistant Professor of Law, Vaikunta Baliga College of Law, Udupi

Download PDF

“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.”   - PLATO

ABSTRACT

This article explores the landscape of electoral reforms in India, focusing on the evolution of the electoral system, key reform initiatives, and their impact on the democratic process. It examines the historical context that has shaped electoral reforms, highlighting the challenges and successes in reforming the electoral framework. The article also discusses the role of various stakeholders, including political parties, civil society, and the Election Commission of India, in driving electoral reforms. Through a comprehensive analysis, it aims to provide insights into the current state of electoral reforms in India and suggest recommendations for further improvements.

Keywords: Election Reforms, Democracy, Civil society & Election Commission

INTRODUCTION

The dictionary meaning of the word election is the act of electing or choosing. In other words an election is a process in which people vote to choose a person or group of people to hold an official position[1]. It is the expression of free will of a person usually by the votes of a constituent body.[2]Elections constitute the essence of democracy, serving as the fundamental mechanism through which individuals engage in civic matters and articulate their preferences. They play a pivotal role in facilitating the peaceful and orderly transfer of power within a democratic system, bestowing legitimacy upon the government's authority. Essentially, elections not only uphold democracy but also infuse it with vitality. Consequently, the conduct of impartial and open elections is an indispensable prerequisite for the functioning of a democratic society.

India stands as both the largest and one of the most populous democracies globally. Despite being confronted with challenges such as illiteracy and poverty, which persist similarly in many developing nations, India's vast and diverse electorate mirrors the intricate tapestry of its society, encompassing differences in caste, religion, region, and language. The monumental task of conducting regular elections in India, encouraging widespread popular participation, is evident.

Over the past seven decades, India has demonstrated a consistent and successful track record in utilizing periodic elections as a means for the seamless transfer of power.[3] More than just a routine process, elections in India have become a reliable and effective method for the peaceful expression of discontent by the public against governmental shortcomings. The Indian populace has repeatedly shown confidence in elections as a powerful, non-violent tool for dissent. This phenomenon aligns with the role that elections play in other successful liberal democracies worldwide, solidifying their integral status in India's democratic framework.

However, certain aberrations have come to the fore in the very working of the electoral system over the years. The need to address such disturbing factors has generated a debate on electoral reforms in the country. The Election Commission which is under the Constitution is vested with the actual power of superintendence, direction and control of elections in the country, has, from time to time, come up with concrete proposals/suggestions based on objective difficulties encountered in the conduct of elections. Politicians, through the platform of parties and Parliament including its various committees constituted for the purpose, have given vent to their desire for reform. Governments have also undertaken certain redemptive measures based on the recommendations of various committees[4]. The process of reforms as well as the debate in this regard has almost been an on-going process.

OVERVIEW OF GENERAL ELECTIONS

India holds a unique position among formerly colonized nations[5], standing out as the world's longest-serving and effective democracy[6]. Notably, it has conducted a remarkable seventeen free and fair general elections for the National Legislature, Lok Sabha, along with over 350 elections for State Legislatures.[7] The continuous process of elections has not only strengthened but also deepened the citizens' commitment to democracy.[8]

The Lok Sabha elections in India operate on a direct basis, with the country divided into territorial constituencies for the electoral process. Currently, seat allocation in the Lok Sabha is ased on the 1971 Census[9] and will remain so until 2026. The Lok Sabha's term, unless dissolved earlier, spans five years from its first scheduled meeting.[10]

Presently, the Lok Sabha comprises 545 seats, with 530 members elected by the 28 States and the remaining 13 from Union territories. The President nominates two members according to Article 331 of the Constitution[11], a provision that included representation for the Anglo-Indian Community until its abolition in 2019. Reserved seats for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are also part of the electoral system. Since 1989, the Lok Sabha's size increased from 544 to 545, with the additional seat resulting from Goa attaining Statehood on May 30, 1987.[12]

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

The Constitution entrusts the responsibility to supervise, direct and control the entire procedure and machinery for election and also for some other ancillary matters, on the Election Commission of India under Article 324. At present, it constitutes the CEC and two Election Commissioners. The Election Commission has the power of superintendence, direction and control of all elections to Parliament and the State Legislature and to the offices of the President and Vice-President. [13]

General Election	Year	Total Number of Seats	Total Number of Candidates	Total Electorate	Average No. of contestant Per seat	Percentage of voting	Total Number of Polling Stations	Expenditure incurred (Rs. In crore)
First	1952	489	1,874	1,73,212,343	4.67	61	196,084	10.45
Second	1957	494	1,519	1,93,652,179	3.77	62	2,20,478	5.90
Third	1962	494	1,985	2,16,361,569	4.02	55	2,38,031	7.82
Fourth	1967	520	2,369	2,50,207,401	4.56	61	2,43,693	10.95
Fifth	1971	518	2,784	2,74,189,132	5.37	55	3,42,918	14.43
Sixth	1977	542	2,439	3,21,174,327	4.50	61	3,73,910	29.86
Seventh	1980	529/542**	4,629	3,56,205,329	8.75	57	4,36,813	37.07
Eighth	1984-85	541/542***	5,492	4,00,375,333	10.15	64	5,06,058	81.51
Ninth	1989	529/543****	6,160	4,98,906,129	11.64	62	5,80,798	154.22
Tenth	1991-92	534/543*****	8,749	5,11,533,598@	16.38	57	5,91,020@ [14]	359.10
Eleventh	1996	543	1,3952	5,92,572,288	25.69	58	7,67,462	597.34
Twelfth	1998	543	4,750	6,05,880,192	8.75	50	7,73,494	626.41
Thirteenth	1999	543	4,648	6,19,536,847	8.56	60	7,74,651	900
Fourteenth	2004	543	5,435	6,71,487,930	10.01	58	6,87,402	1114
Fifteenth	2009	543	8,070	71,69,85,101	14.86	58.19	8,30,866	846.67
Sixteenth	2014	543	8251	834101479	15.2	66.4	919452	3426
Seventeenth	2019	543	8026	897811627	14.89	67%	1035919	50000

There has been a marked increase in the total number of candidates contesting the elections. While in 1952, 1864 candidates contested for 489 elective seats, in 2019, 8026 candidates were in the fray for 543 seats. A Table detailing the general election, number of election seats, candidates contested, electorate etc. is given above[15][16]

FIRST-PAST-THE-POST-SYSTEM

As far as the issue of electoral reforms in India is concerned, the overall focus has been the system that governs representation to the popular chamber in Parliament as well as to the various State Legislative Assemblies in the country. The system of representation here refers to the one commonly known as the “First-Past-the-Post-System”. Of all the candidates contesting, it is the one who wins largest number of votes as compared to all others individually, gets elected.

I.                   Universal Adult Franchise

One of the central features of the Electoral System in India is that it is based on the Universal Adult Franchise enunciated in Article 326. While the Constitution under article 326 makes it one of the cardinal features of the electoral system, the Representation of People Act, 1950 vide its Section 23 effectuates it. There shall be one electoral roll for every territorial constituency for election to either House of Parliament or to the State Legislature and no person shall be excluded from such roll on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex or any of them”.[17]

II.            Multiparty System

Beyond the previously mentioned factors, several other factors have played a role in driving electoral reforms in India. The proliferation of regional parties, owing to the multiparty system in India as opposed to the two-party system in many other countries, has been a significant influence. Concurrently, there has been a notable rise in the number of independent candidates, impacting the stability of the ruling government and contributing to phenomena such as political defections and coalition politics.

In addition to these dynamics, the escalating electoral expenses over time have raised concerns, turning elections into a domain largely accessible to the affluent. This economic aspect has also fueled the growth of political corruption.

Furthermore, electoral malpractices, including booth capturing, poll rigging, violence, and a prevailing sense of apathy among the populace towards participating in elections, are additional issues that require attention and resolution. Addressing these concerns is crucial for the promotion of free and fair elections.[18]

ELECTORAL REFORMS IN INDIA

The need for electoral reforms was increasingly felt towards the late 1960‟s in India. Till then the electoral system had functioned quite satisfactorily except for few of aberrations in the form of some malpractices like rigging or violence which are rather small in number. There was one party rule at the Centre and in most of the States. But this scenario began to change after the Fourth General elections held in 1967. Regional parties and rule by coalition of parties began to emerge in the States. The emergence of alternative party governments in the State witnessed the accentuation of some of the negative traits and distortions in the political system which manifested themselves in a greater degree in electoral politics.[19]

A parliamentary Committee was constituted for the first time in 1970 to suggest amendments to Election Law from all angles. But with the dissolution of Lok Sabha in December 1970, the life of this Committee also came to an end. Subsequent to the Constitution of a new Lok Sabha in 1971, Parliament formed a Joint Parliamentary Committee on Amendments to Election Law headed by Shri Jagannath Rao.

In subsequent years, a number of Committees viz. the Tarkunde Committee (1974), the Dinesh Goswami Committee (1990), V.K. Krishna Iyer Committee (1994) and the Indrajit Gupta Committee (1998) have been constituted to examine issues relating to electoral reforms. Apart from these, the Election Commission has also, from time to time, made proposals for reforms. Starting from 1970, the Election Commission has submitted its recommendations on electoral reforms in 1977, 1982, 1990, 1992 and 2004. These apart, political parties through the platform of all-party meetings have also suggested for electoral reforms. The Law Commission (i.e. the 15th Law Commission) was also constituted in November, 1977 for an exhaustive study of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 with a view to finding out and identifying the measures necessary in the direction of electoral reforms. The Law Commission has submitted its 170th report regarding reform of the Election System. In addition, Government has also initiated redemptive measures from time to time.

PROPOSALS/SUGGESTIONS FOR REFORMS

The Supreme Court of India, in the matter of Public Interest Foundation & Others V. Union of India & Anr- Writ Petition (Civil) No. 536 of 2011[20], directed the Law Commission of India to make suggestions on two specific issues, viz., (i) curbing criminalization of politics and needed law reform; and (ii) impact and consequences of candidates filing false affidavits and needed law reforms to check such practice‟. In the light of this judgment, the Commission worked specifically on these two areas and, after series of discussions, followed by a National Consultation held on 1st February 2014, submitted its 244th Report titled “Electoral Disqualification” on 24th February 2014 to the Government of India.

The Law Commission of India, under the leadership of Justice Shri A. P. Shah, submitted Report No. 255 titled "Electoral Reforms" to the Union Law and Justice Ministry. Chairman Justice Shri A. P. Shah presented the comprehensive 201-page report following thorough discussions and consultations with stakeholders, including registered national and state political parties. The commission conducted an exhaustive and detailed analysis of various issues before finalizing the report.

Following is the summary of the report on various issues discussed in the report:

1.      Election Finance

The Law Commission has recommended extensive reforms concerning candidate expenses, including proposing limits, disclosure obligations for both individual candidates and political parties, and stipulating penalties for political parties. Additionally, the Commission has examined the concept of state funding for elections.

Introduced in 2018, the electoral bond scheme serves as a method of political funding. Its primary objectives include enhancing accountability, curbing the proliferation of black money, and fostering transparency in the funding and donations received by political parties. Eligibility for receiving these bonds is limited to political parties registered under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and having secured more than one percent of the votes in the previous Lok Sabha election.

The Law Commission, in its evaluation, does not view a system of complete state funding of elections or the provision of matching grants as feasible, considering the current conditions in the country.

2.      Regulation of Political Parties and Inner Party Democracy

Democratic theory encompasses both procedural and substantive dimensions. Procedural democracy entails aspects such as universal adult franchise, periodic elections, and the use of a secret ballot. On the other hand, substantive democracy pertains to the internal democratic processes within political parties, which are presumed to represent the interests of the people. This section focuses on examining the internal democratic operations of political parties and addresses the issue of how parties should operate and establish self-regulation.[21]

3.      Proportional Representation

It is clear that both the electoral systems come with their own merits and demerits – proportional representation theoretically being more representative, while the FPTP system being more stable. It is also clear, from the experience of other countries that any changes in India‟s electoral system will have to follow a hybrid pattern combining elements of both direct and indirect elections. This, in turn will necessitate an increase in the number of seats in the Lok Sabha, which raises concerns regarding its effective functioning.[22]

4.      Anti Defection Law in India

Transfer the authority for deciding defection-related disqualification issues from the Speaker or Chairman to the President or Governor, who will act based on the Election Commission of India's advice. This proposed amendment aims to uphold the integrity of the Speaker's office.

In a recent landmark decision, the Supreme Court made two significant pronouncements. Firstly, it mandated that Speakers of both State Assemblies and Parliament must adjudicate on disqualification petitions within three months, unless extraordinary circumstances exist. The court also asserted that judicial intervention is permissible in cases of delayed proceedings. Secondly, the court recommended that Parliament seriously considers relinquishing the disqualification powers of Speakers and establishes an independent tribunal to handle such petitions. This suggestion is grounded in the concern that Speakers, being predominantly affiliated with ruling parties, may exhibit partisan behavior.[23]

5.      Strengthening the office of the Election Commission of India

The ECI should be strengthened by first, giving equal constitutional protection to all members of the Commission in matters of removability; second, making the appointment process of the Election Commissioners and the CEC consultative; and third, creating a permanent, independent Secretariat for the ECI.

6.      Paid News and Political Advertisements

Proposed amendments to the RP Act 1951 suggest the inclusion of provisions designating the publication and encouragement of "paid news" as an electoral offense under Chapter III of Part VII of the RP Act, 1951. The recommended punishment for such offenses is a minimum of two years of imprisonment.

To address the issue of covert political advertisements, it is proposed that mandatory disclosure provisions be instituted for all types of media.

7.      Opinion Polls

Section 126 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, prohibits the display of any election-related material through cinematography, television, or similar means to the public during the 48 hours leading up to the conclusion of the poll, in addition to forbidding the holding, convening, or attendance of any public meeting or procession. Violating this prohibition is a criminal offense, carrying a penalty of imprisonment for up to two years, a fine, or both.[24]

8.      Compulsory Voting

The Law Commission does not recommend the introduction of compulsory voting in India and in fact, believes it to be highly undesirable for a variety of reasons described above such as being undemocratic, illegitimate, expensive, unable to improve quality political participation and awareness, and difficult to implement.

9.      Election Petitions

Wide-ranging reforms have been suggested by the Election Commission to deal with “disputes regarding elections”.

10.   NOTA and the Right to Reject

The Law Commission currently rejects the extension of the NOTA principle to introduce a right to reject the candidate and invalidate the election in cases where a majority of the votes have been polled in favour of the NOTA option.

11.  The Right to Recall

The Law Commission opposes the introduction of the right to recall in any form, as it has the potential to result in an overabundance of democracy. This concept is seen as detrimental as it undermines the independence of elected candidates, neglects minority interests, heightens instability and chaos, amplifies the likelihood of misuse and abuse, and proves challenging and costly to implement in practice, particularly within the context of India's adherence to the first-past-the-post system.

12.  Totaliser for Counting of Votes

The Commission emphasizes and supports the Election Commission of India's proposal to implement a totaliser for counting votes cast in electronic voting machines. This measure aims to prevent the identification of voting trends in specific polling stations, reducing the potential harassment of voters in those areas. Unlike the practice with ballot papers under Rule 59A of the Election Rules before the introduction of EVMs, a similar mixing method is not allowed for EVMs. The use of a totaliser would enhance the confidentiality of votes during the counting process, safeguarding against the revelation of voting patterns and addressing concerns about intimidation and victimization.

13.  Restriction on Government Sponsored Advertisements

The Commission recommends regulating and restricting government sponsored advertisements six months prior to the date of expiry of the House/Assembly to maintain the purity of elections; prevent the use of public money for partisan interests of, inter alia, highlighting the government’s achievements; and ensure that the ruling party or candidate does not get an undue advantage over another in the spirit of free and fair elections.[25]

14.  Restriction on the Number of Seats from which a Candidate May Contest

The Law Commission recommends an amendment of section 33(7) of the RPA[26], which permits a candidate to contest any election (parliamentary, assembly, biennial council, or bye-elections) from up to two constituencies. expenditure of time and effort; election fatigue; and the harassment caused to the voters, section 33(7) should be amended to permit candidates to stand from only one constituency.

15.  Independent Candidates

The Law Commission proposes a prohibition on independent candidates from participating in elections. The existing system permits the emergence of numerous independent candidates, often acting as dummy or non-serious contenders, or individuals standing solely to create confusion among voters by sharing the same name. Therefore, the Commission recommends amending sections 4 and 5 of the Representation of the People Act (RPA) to stipulate that only political parties registered with the Election Commission of India under section 11(4) are eligible to contest Lok Sabha or Vidhan Sabha elections.

16.  Preparation and Use of Common Electoral Rolls

The Law Commission endorses the ECI’s suggestions regarding the introduction of common electoral rolls for Parliamentary, Assembly and local body elections.

CONCLUSION

It is acknowledged that the electoral process in the country has accumulated certain deficiencies over time that requires rectification. However, addressing these issues should occur through thorough deliberation and discourse, adopting a gradual and ongoing approach.

Governments at the Center, in succession, have recognized the significance of matters pertaining to electoral reforms. Recommendations put forth by the Election Commission and various committees on electoral reforms have been consistently examined and put into practice. It is emphasized that, when contemplating proposals and suggestions for electoral process reforms, obtaining the consensus of political parties in the country is deemed essential.

Government recognized that electoral reforms is a continuous process and it shall be the Endeavour of all the stakeholders including Government, Election Commission of India, Law commission, etc. to implement such proposals on electoral reforms on which consensus emerges, from time to time.

[1] CollinsDictionary.com, 'Election' <https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/election> accessed 2 January 2024

[2]Thomas Davidson, Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary (Chambers 1948) 298

[3] VoiceNet, 'Leveraging Technology in Elections' (2024) https://voicenet.in/Article_leveraging_technology%20.htm accessed 8 March 2024.

[4] Here is a list of some key committees and commissions that have been instrumental in recommending electoral reforms in India:

1.       Sarkaria Commission (1983-1988): This commission was formed to examine the relationship between the central government and state governments and made several recommendations on electoral reforms.

2.     Rajiv Goswami Committee (1990): This committee was formed in the aftermath of the Mandal Commission protests and recommended lowering the voting age from 21 to 18.

3.       Indrajit Gupta Committee (1998): This committee recommended several electoral reforms, including state funding of elections, reducing election expenditure, and preventing the criminalization of politics.

4.       Vohra Committee (1993): While not specifically focused on electoral reforms, the Vohra Committee report highlighted the nexus between criminals, politicians, and bureaucrats, which has implications for electoral processes.

5.       Law Commission Reports: The Law Commission of India has published several reports on electoral reforms, including those related to decriminalization of politics, state funding of elections, and improving the electoral process.

6.       National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2000-2002): This commission made recommendations on various aspects of the Indian Constitution, including electoral reforms.

7.       Justice J. M. Lyngdoh Committee (2004): This committee was formed to recommend measures to ensure free and fair elections. It made recommendations on issues such as the use of money power in elections and the conduct of political parties.

8.       Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2008): This commission made recommendations on electoral reforms, including measures to improve the functioning of the Election Commission of India and prevent electoral malpractices.

9.       Election Commission Reports: The Election Commission of India has published several reports on electoral reforms, highlighting issues such as campaign finance reform, voting technology, and electoral administration.

[5] Colonized nations are countries that have been subjected to colonial rule, typically by European powers, in which the colonizing country establishes control over the territory, government, and resources of the colonized nation. This control is often maintained through military force and administrative structures established by the colonizer. Colonized nations are often exploited for their natural resources, labor, and markets, with little regard for the well-being or self-determination of the indigenous population. The process of colonization often leads to significant social, cultural, political, and economic changes in the colonized nation, with lasting impacts that can persist long after the colonial period has endedTop of Form

[6] Lydia Polgreen, 'The World’s Biggest Democracy Is Jettisoning Freedom and Tolerance' (The New York Times, 8 February 2023)

[7]Chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2017/27935/27935_2017_ 150150573_Judgement_15-Feb-2024.pdf

[8] Aithal KR, 'Electoral Reform: Party List System a Better Alternative?' (1997) XXI CULR 242.

[9]https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/understanding-the-delimitation-exercise explained/article67819203.ece

[10]Election Commission of India (1997), Report on Manuel of Election Law, 6th June 1997, Government of India.

[11] https://www.constitutionofindia.net/articles/article-331-representation-of-the-anglo-indian-community-in-the-house-of-the-people/#:~:text=SUMMARY,community%20wasn%27t%20adequately%20represented  accessed 8 March 2024

[12]M. L. Ahuja, Electoral Politics and General Election in India (Vikas Publishing House 1993).

[13]C. Subhash Kashyap, Elections and Political Parties- Problems and Processes (National Book Trust 2009).

[14] Indian Constitution,  Sch 1, Excluding Jammu and Kashmir.

[15] Source: 1. General Election-A Reference Handbook Vol. I (Press Information Bureau of I&B 2014)

[16] General Election Statistical Report: 2019 (2019).

[17]Venkatesh. B. Kumar, Electoral Reforms in India: Current Discourses (Rawat Publications 2009).

[18]Paul Wallace and Ramashray Roy (ed), India’s 2009 Elections: Coalition Politics, Party Competition and Congress Continuity (Sage Publishers 2011).

[19]Paul Wallace (ed), India’s 2014 Elections- A Modi Led BJP Sweep (Sage Publishers, New Delhi, 2015).

[20]  Public Interest Foundation & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr. (2018) Supreme Court of India Criminal Appeal Nos. 1714-1715 Of 2007 Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 208 Of 2011 And Writ Petition (CIVIL) NO. 800 OF 2015 25 September 2018,  Available at: https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2011/36674/36674_2011_Judgement_25-Sep-2018.pdf (Accessed: February 2024).

[21]Indrajith Gupta Committee, Report on State Funding of Elections (Government of India, 8 January 1998).

[22]Bimal Jalal, India: Priorities for the Future (Penguin Publishing House 2017).

[23]N N Vohra Committee, Report on Criminalization of Politics (Government of India, 3 March 1993).

[24]Public Opinion Polling Basics (n.d.) Pew Research Center. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/course/public-opinion-polling-basics/ (Accessed: 7 February 2024).

[25]New Reference Notes (2020) Available at: https://loksabhadocs.nic.in/Refinput/New_Reference_Notes/English/04022020_105450_102120474.pdf (Accessed: 6 February 2024).

[26]Representation of the People Act 1951, s 33(7). allows a person to contest election for the same office from two constituencies at the same time.