(CJI) DY Chandrachud (Photo: PTI)
The Center on Wednesday defended in the Supreme Court the appointment of two new Election Commissioners (ECs) under a 2023 law that excludes the Chief Justice of India from the selection committee, saying the election commission’s independence does not arise from the presence of a judicial member from the Commission.
In an affidavit filed before the apex court, the Union Law Ministry rejected the petitioner’s claim that the two election commissioners were hastily appointed on March 14 to “pre-empt” the top court’s orders the next day when the matters came up for discussion were about the 2023 day. law were listed for hearing on interim measures.
The affidavit has been filed in response to a batch of pleas, including those by Congress leader Jaya Thakur and the Association for Democratic Reforms, challenging the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. .
“It is submitted that the petitioners’ case is based on one fundamental misconception that the independence of any authority can only be maintained if the selection committee has a certain wording. It is to be noted that the independence of the Election Commission, or any other authority, organization or authority, does not arise from and is not attributable to the presence of any judicial member in the Selection Commission,” the affidavit said.
Refuting the petitioners’ claim that no list of probable appointees was shared with the Opposition, the Center submitted that the names of shortlisted persons were made available to Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury on March 13, 2024 , after the Search Committee had finalized six names for recommendation.
“It is therefore completely wrong, misleading and malicious to suggest that the third member of the Selection Committee was shortlisted as an act of premeditation in the minds of the two members of the Executive as all members received the list at the same time . Moreover, the list of dates clearly shows that the profiles of all eligible persons were shared with the leader of the largest opposition party in Lok Saba on March 13, 2024.
“It may be noted that the persons ultimately appointed were from the list thus shared. This belies the petitioners’ claim that no list was shared prior to the meeting,” the affidavit said.
The Center argued that it is only seeking to create a political controversy based on ‘bald, baseless and pernicious’ statements about certain vague and unspecified motives behind the appointment.
It said that at no point were the credentials of those ultimately appointed as Election Commissioners questioned and no objection was raised as to the suitability, suitability or competence of any of the listed persons to serve as Election Commissioner .
“If no doubt has been raised as to the qualifications of candidates to hold a constitutional post, nor if any material has been adduced to show that the candidates are unfit for office, prima facie it cannot be said that there is any evidence is delivered. On this basis alone, the application for suspension should be rejected,” the statement said.
Arguing that the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Tenure) Act, 2023 is a significant improvement in the appointment process of election commissioners, the Center said it provides for a more democratic, collaborative and inclusive exercise.
The affidavit refuted petitioners’ claims that the executive overreached and infringed on the autonomy of the Election Commission.
“To indicate, as the petitioners suggest, that selection committees without judicial members would always be biased is completely incorrect. It is submitted that such an argument would imply an implicit limitation on the otherwise plenary power of Article 324(2), which is impermissible.
“The Electoral Commissioners have been able to function neutrally and effectively even in an era of complete discretion in appointment. As a high constitutional office, the Chief Electoral Commissioner enjoys protections built into the Constitution that enable them to take action. impartially,” the report said, adding that the allegations of disingenuous motive and premeditation on the part of the government are completely baseless.
The apex court had on Friday refused to stay the appointment of new Election Commissioners (ECs) under the 2023 Act.
The two vacancies had arisen following the retirement of Anup Chandra Pandey on February 14 and the sudden resignation of Arun Goel. Retired IAS officers Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu were appointed in their place.
Under the new law, the selection panel will have the Prime Minister as its chairman, and the Leader of the Opposition and a Union Minister appointed by the Prime Minister will be the other two members.
A five-judge Constitution bench had in March 2023 ruled that the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) would be appointed on the advice of a committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India.
(Only the headline and image of this report may have been reworked by Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is automatically generated from a syndicated feed.)
First print: March 21, 2024 | 12:38 pm IST
