#*Counter reply to the Election commission of India* - #*my PIL on extensive Electrical Reforms*
விரிவான தேர்தல் சீர்திருத்தம் வேண்டும் என்று என்னுடைய வழக்கு, கடந்த ஆண்டு சென்னை உயர்நீதிமன்றத்தில் ஏற்றுக் கொள்ளப்பட்டு, மத்திய அரசுக்கும் இந்திய தேர்தல் ஆணையத்துக்கும் தாக்கீது அனுப்பியதையும் என் மனுவையும் முழுமையாக என்னுடைய சமூக வலைதளங்களில் பதிவு செய்திருந்தேன். அந்த மனுவின் மேல் தேர்தல் ஆணையம் பதில் மனு தாக்கல் செய்திருந்தது. அந்த பதில் மனுவுக்கு பதில் அளிக்கும் வகையில் என்னுடைய கவுண்ட்டர் மனு (Counter reply petition) பதிவு செய்தேன். அந்த மனுவை இங்கே இணைத்துள்ளேன்.
****
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICARTURE AT MADRAS
SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
W.P. No. 27364 of 2021
K.S. Radhakrishnan
S/o. K.V. Srinivasan,
No. 4/359, Sri Chaithanya Avenue
Anna Salai, East Coast Road
Palavakkam, Chennai – 600041
Tamil Nadu ...Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India
Through the Secretary,
Ministry of Law and Justice,
Shashtri Bhawan,
New Delhi-110001
2. Election Commission of India
Through the Director Law,
NiravachanSadan,
Ashoka Road,
New Delhi-110001 …Respondents
Rejoinder to the Counter Affidavit of Respondent No. 1.
I, K.S. Radhakrishnan S/o K.V. Srinvasan aged about 64 years, residing at No. 4/359 Anna Salai, Palavakkam, Chennai 600 041, native of Kurunjakulam, then Tirunalveli District, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows: -
1. I deny all the averments made in the counter affidavit filed by the Respondent No.1 except those that are specifically admitted herein. This reply to the counter maybe read as part and parcel of the affidavit filed by the petitioner along with Writ Petition.
2. I state that the reforms in the constitutional machineries are order of the day especially the election process in India has been undergoing a lot of changes from time to time to ensure the free and fair election. The Election commission has been taking several steps to prevent corruption practices, criminalization of politics, accumulation of disproportionate wealth by the elected members etc., However, it still it requires a lot of reformation.
3. I deny the averments made in para 2, 3 and 4. The Respondent has not clearly scrutinized the affidavit filed by the petitioner along with the writ petition. The Respondent No.1 has constituted several committees/commissions to formulate the free and fair election and give the recommendation on electoral reforms. They are:
i) Jagannath Rao Committee (1971)
ii) Lok Sabha Bill No. 100 (1973)
iii) Certain amendments on Election expenses (Act no. 40 of 1975)
iv) Justice V.M Tarkunde Committee during Janta rule
v) Goswami Committee on Electoral Reforms (1990)
vi) Vohra Committee Report (1993)
vii) The Senshan Bills (1994) for certain Electoral reforms
viii) Indrajit Gupta Committee on State Funding of Elections (1998)
ix) Law Commission on Reform of the Electoral Laws, Justice M.N. Venkatachelliah committee (1999)
x) National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2001)
xi) Election Commission of India- Proposed Electoral Reforms ( 2004)
xii) The Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2008)
xiii) Core committee on Electoral Reforms of the Ministry of Law and Justice of the Government of India (2010)
xiv) The 244th Report of the Law Commission (2014). (As per the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed an order on 16th December 2013 in Public Interest Foundation vs Union of India, W.P (Civil) 536 of 2011)
xv) Certain directions of The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India
Yogesh Gupta vs Election Commission of India (2015) etc.
xvi) Various Political Parties representation in this regard
Normally Reforms concern:
1. Criminalisation of Politics;
2. Financing of Elections;
3. Conduct and Better Management of Elections;
4. Regulations of Political Parties;
5. Auditing of Finances of Political Parties;
6. Adjudication of Election Disputes; and
7. Review of Anti-Defection Laws and also other various issues.
There has also been a great deal of substantive work on the topic of Electoral Reforms undertaken by various civil society groups, which have contributed significantly to the public disclosure on the subject. This paper looks at four critical issues with which any serious discussion on Electoral Reforms should begin with, namely:
1. Criminalisation of Politics;
2. Financing of Elections;
3. Curbing Electoral Offenses and Malpractices; and
4. Regulations of Political Parties.
Though the above committees have given recommendations in detail to reforms on the electoral process, the respondents have not implemented the same in their spirit. The minor corrections made by the 2nd respondent in the election process in the year 1996-96 has not yielded any fruitful result in the next elections.
4. I state that the Respondent failed to appreciate the fact that as per Article 324 of Constitution of India “Free and Fair elections” are a broad based sheet anchored for election. The control of election process by the 2nd Respondent’s orders are inadequate to meet the requirement of various malpractices in elections. I state that the Courts do not legislate a new law under Article 324 but only identifies the areas of reformation which is not forbidden
5. I state that the pendency of the litigations against the 2nd respondent before the Supreme Court and other High Courts seeking reforms in the election process, are based on various other grounds and the respondent cannot take shelter under the same and pray for the dismissal of this writ petition.
6. I state that it is obvious that nowadays the election is not regarded as democratic process which gives an opportunity to serve the people and nation rather most of the politicians and common public feels that its corrupt practice is the part of election, easy way to make more money, show their community power, place for distribution of freebees
7. I deny the averments made in unnumbered para and paras 6 and 7. I had approached this Hon’ble court for the common cause to ensure the undefiled election. I state the 2nd respondent has failed to restrict the political parties who are influencing the people with false political promise, deployment of candidate with criminal records, communal enticement and freebees. The reformation so far carried out in the election process are due to legal obligation arose out of orders by the courts due to recommendation of any of the committees. The respondents did not find come out with any clear mechanism to ensure the free and fair election without any political interference.
8. I state that the respondent failed to monitor the political parties in the following areas:
a. The free bees offer given by political parties under the guise of social welfare measure in violation of the concept of bribery have not been scrutinized by the 2nd respondent election commission in any point of time. The 2nd respondent did not seek clarification from any political parties regarding their election manifesto or freebees even after completion of election. The petitioner hereby states that he does not have any concern on the freebees given for the uplift of downtrodden people to improve their education, health and employment. But the political parties blindfold promises on the freebees such as free bus tickets for ladies irrespective of their economic status, color tv, mixer grinder etc., are purely to grab the innocence voters which weakening the economy of the country and there is no positive impact and to improve their lifestyle. The 2nd respondent remains silent spectator and does not look into the political promise made by the political parties whether their promises are realistic, reasonable and for the upliftment of downtrodden people. The freebees except related to health, education and employment shall not be entertained by the 2nd respondent during the election campaign and also the 2nd respondent shall inquire the political party when they fail to comply with their commitment to the people during the elections. It is submitted that tall and false promises during election campaign are not healthy trend. Money and muscle power are nowadays common factors during elections. Promises in election manifesto of political parties must be implemented if they are elected to power, they should not go back from the above promises mentioned in the election manifesto for the welfare of the people. Equally, voters duty should be accounted in such a way they have to exercise their franchise without fail. It’s commonly known as compulsory voting like in Australia. If anyone fails to cast their vote the Government will penalize and cut the welfare schemes provided by the Australian Government which is the practice followed.
b. It is the legal duty of an Australian citizen aged 18 and over to register to vote and go to the polls. If a person fails to vote it can result in a fine and potentially a day in court. Even though the right to vote is freedom sought by people all over the world, Australians do not have a choice in the matter as the country makes voting mandatory. According to the BBC, Australia is part of a small minority of just 23 countries with mandatory voting laws.
c. Secondly, there shall be a proper mechanism to be formulated by the 2nd respondent to regulate the selection process of the candidate by the political parties. The recent scenario shows the selection of candidate by the political parties are shocking and unhealthy to the democracy. The selection of the candidate is being held in a undemocratic manner. The party cadre who is associated with several years is being denied the seat to contest the election and the new comers, or cash rich people who can spend money to grab the votes are being entertained. It is also submitted that the political parties high command calls for the applications and conduct interviews and select their candidates for Elections. In this connection political parties circulate due applications for this with application fee and also registration fee which runs several thousands. Thus, they conduct the interviews selecting the candidates without any previous work experience for that Political Party. People who worked more than 40 years sincerely for their respective parties are denied to contest the elections. Even new comers without any political experience and service and also rejected from other parties easily getting tickets to contest the elections. There are some quid pro quo understandings. The method adopted by the political parties in choosing the candidate is not regulated by the 2nd respondent. This clearly shows that the 2nd respondent miserably fails every time to discharge their constitutional mandate to conduct the election in the free and fair manner.
d. The evil of caste system is being played a vital role while selecting the candidate. The petitioner states that this is fatal to the democracy. Before three decades, no matter what the major community in a particular locality is, the leaders participated in the election without considering the predominant community of the region, without any money power. Eg. Late Mr. Kamaraj, who hailed from Virudhunagar District won in the Gudiyattam, Vellore District by election held in the year 1954. Similarly, Late Mr.😭. Krishmachari who based out of Chennai contested and won in Tiruchendur parliament constituency. The recent communal based political approach will lead to destruction of democracy which should be curtailed by the 2nd respondent.
9. I deny the averment made in para 8,9,10 and 11. The amendments to the candidature form expansion of the details of the candidate in respect to criminal antecedent was the outcome of the efforts by various judicial decisions and political activist to eliminate the criminals from politics. However, the 2nd respondent has to do many works to ensure the fair poll.
10. I state that the affidavit prescribed by the 2nd respondent under rule 4 A of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 is inadequate and it does not cover the profile of the candidate completely. It just speaks about their wealth condition, criminal records and detail of tax assessment. It also shall cover the period of the public life of the candidate, his association with the political party if any, the description of the political career etc., The 2nd respondent shall insist these details at least from the candidate of the recognized or registered political party.
11. I deny the averment made in para 12 to 17. The 2nd respondent shall also look in to the method of conducting the election in the digital mode as few countries do such as voting with mobile phone/ATM center etc., The petition denies the allegations that the prayer of the petitioner is vague without looking into the same. The respondents shall give due weightage to the contents of the petitioner unlike they have acted on the recommendation by various electoral reform committee.
12. I submit that I am undertaking certain research work on Electoral Reforms during my student politics days, 1970’s and also written columns in this regard both English and Tamil Dailies. So, my efforts are very honest and sincere in this regard more than fourty years. This petition is not for personal publicity. Hence this petition is for clean public life and for pure politics.
13. I state that I am constrained to approach this Hon’ble Court seeking for issuance of appropriate directions or orders under Art 324 of the constitution of India in ensuring free and fair election taking note of the directions under the Table given hereunder ;-
TABLE – 1
S.No.
DIRECTION
A.
Requirement to make necessary amendments to the format of Affidavit in order to make it mandatory for the Candidates to provide information with regard to their wealth and assets acquired during the date of joining into politics / getting membership in any political partyAND the source of legitimate income for acquiring the properties and its other sources in order to test the veracity of the wealth and assets provide by such persons.
B.
Requirement to make amendments to present Affidavit / Declaration format and making it mandate for the candidate to provide full details about the Political Parties to which they belong and intention of the candidates in joining politics.
C.
To publish the all said information in an easily accessible format for the general public.
D.
To frame proper guidelines/policies in respect of election expenditures by the Political Parties to prevent corrupt practices and the candidates shall ensure by way of declaration that they shall not directly or indirectly indulge in corrupt practices like bribing money to the voters.
E.
The contesting candidates shall ensure to file all the necessary documents in support of the averments made in the affidavit along with nomination paper before accepting the Nomination paper.
F.
To categorize and monitor the property and possession details of all the politicians who wish to contest in elections
G.
To maintain a column that contains all the details of public works contributed by the politicians who wish to contest in elections.
To issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly a Writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to implement the contents mentioned in the a Table - 1 of this affidavit to be included the model code of conduct of the elections in India by invoking Article 324 of the Constitution of India and pass such other further order (s) that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.
Solemnly affirmed at Chennai Before me,
on this the 22nd day of August,2022
and signed his name in my presenceAdvocate: Madras.
#ksrpost
16-10-2022.
No comments:
Post a Comment