Committees Related to Electoral Reforms
Over the years, several committees and commissions in India have analyzed the electoral system, the mechanics of elections, and the procedures involved. Based on their findings, they have recommended various reforms to enhance the electoral process. This article delves into the significant committees and their recommendations regarding electoral reforms in India.
One of the earliest committees was the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Amendments to Election Laws, which operated between 1971 and 1972. This committee took a comprehensive look at the existing election laws and suggested necessary amendments to improve the electoral process.
Shortly after, in 1974, during the "Total Revolution" movement led by Jayaprakash Narayan, the Tarkunde Committee was established. Although this committee was unofficial, it played a critical role in highlighting issues within the electoral framework and submitted its report in 1975.
The Dinesh Goswami Committee, formed in 1990, focused specifically on electoral reforms and made significant recommendations for improving the electoral process, which were crucial for future laws.
In 1993, the Vohra Committee was set up to explore the connections between crime and politics, acknowledging that criminal elements were infiltrating the political system. This committee's findings highlighted the urgent need for reform to uphold the integrity of elections.
In 1998, the Election Commission of India put forth several recommendations aimed at electoral reforms, followed by the Indrajit Gupta Committee, which examined the idea of state funding for elections, also in 1998. This committee sought to establish a more level playing field for candidates and minimize the influence of money in politics.
The Law Commission of India, in its 170th report published in 1999, tackled the reform of electoral laws, contributing to the ongoing discussion about how to improve fairness in elections. Furthermore, the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, active from 2000 to 2002 and headed by M.N. Venkatachaliah, also touched on electoral reforms, evaluating how well the existing constitutional framework was serving democracy.
In 2004, the Election Commission of India released another report proposing further electoral reforms. The Second Administrative Reforms Commission, led by Veerappa Moily in 2007, examined ethics in governance, emphasizing the importance of transparency in the electoral process.
In 2010, the Tankha Committee was formed to look into the broad spectrum of election laws and electoral reforms, while the JS Verma Committee Report, published in 2013, focused on amendments to criminal law, highlighting the intersection of crime and electoral integrity. The Law Commission of India continued its work with the 244th report on electoral disqualifications in 2014 and the 255th report on broader electoral reforms in 2015.
As a result of the recommendations provided by these committees and commissions, numerous reforms have been introduced in India's electoral framework. These reforms can be categorized into four main periods:
- Electoral Reforms before 1996: This period saw the initial introduction of reforms that laid the groundwork for future changes.
- Electoral Reforms of 1996: A significant year when crucial recommendations were put into practice.
- Electoral Reforms after 1996: Continuous efforts to refine the electoral process based on prior learnings and societal changes.
- Electoral Reforms since 2010: A modern approach to addressing contemporary issues in the electoral process, emphasizing transparency and reducing the influence of criminal roles.
In conclusion, the persistent efforts of these committees reflect India's commitment to ensuring free, fair, and transparent elections. Articles and laws enshrined in the Indian Constitution, particularly Articles 325 to 329, govern the conduct of elections, emphasizing equality in voting, and providing legal frameworks for electoral procedures. By adhering to these recommendations, India aims to strengthen its democratic processes and enhance public confidence in the election system.
Electoral Reforms in India Before 1996
Electoral reforms in India have played a crucial role in shaping a fair and transparent voting process. Some significant changes were implemented before 1996, aimed at enhancing democracy and increasing voter participation.
One of the key reforms was the Lowering of Voting Age. The 61st Constitutional Amendment Act of 1988 reduced the minimum voting age from 21 years to 18 years. This change was made to encourage the youth of India, who had long been underrepresented in the political realm, to take part in elections. By allowing younger individuals to vote, the amendment aimed to ensure that their voices were heard and that they engaged more actively in the democratic process.
In 1989, a new provision was introduced regarding Election Commission personnel. This regulation stated that officers and staff members involved in creating and updating electoral rolls would be considered on "deputation" to the Election Commission. During this time, these individuals would operate under the guidance and supervision of the Election Commission. This step was taken to make the electoral process more organized and efficient.
Another important reform was the Increase in Number of Proposers for candidates running for the Rajya Sabha and state legislative councils, also instituted in 1989. The number of electors needed to sign nomination papers as proposers was raised to either 10% of the total electorate in the constituency or a maximum of ten electors, whichever was lower. This measure aimed to discourage non-serious candidates from contesting elections frivolously, ensuring that only candidates with genuine support could stand for election.
The introduction of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) in 1989 marked a significant technological advancement in the voting process. Initially used experimentally in the state assembly elections of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and Delhi in 1998, EVMs were fully deployed in the 1999 general elections in Goa. The use of EVMs aimed to make the voting process quicker and more efficient, while also reducing the chances of vote tampering.
A significant issue faced by election authorities was booth capturing, which is a tactic used to manipulate election outcomes. In response to this, provisions were made in 1989 to allow for the adjournment of polling or the cancellation of elections if booth capturing was reported. Booth capturing includes various illegal actions, such as taking over a polling station, forcing polling officials to hand over ballot papers, restricting access to only certain voters, or intimidating voters to prevent them from casting their ballots.
To further improve the integrity of the electoral process, the Elector’s Photo Identity Card (EPIC) was introduced. In 1993, the Election Commission decided to issue photo ID cards to voters across the country. This initiative was designed to reduce incidents of bogus voting and impersonation at polling stations. The electoral rolls served as the foundation for issuing these identity cards, which made the voting process more straightforward, efficient, and secure.
These reforms were integral in enhancing the electoral framework in India, fostering greater public confidence in the democratic process, and ensuring a more representative and participatory system of governance. By amending laws and introducing new regulations, the government aimed to create an electoral landscape that was fairer and more accessible to all citizens.
Electoral Reforms of 1996
In 1990, India saw an important step toward improving its election process when the National Front Government, led by V.P. Singh, set up a committee focused on electoral reforms. This committee, chaired by Dinesh Goswami, who was the Law Minister at the time, was tasked with examining the electoral system in detail and suggesting ways to fix its weaknesses. The committee presented its report in 1990, containing several recommendations, of which some were put into action by 1996.
One significant change was how the names of candidates are listed during elections. Candidates are classified into three categories for this purpose: those representing recognized political parties, those from registered but unrecognized parties, and independent candidates. Their names should be organized in this specific order on ballots and other election materials, and within each category, candidates must be listed alphabetically.
Another important reform is related to the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act of 1971. Individuals convicted of specific offenses under this law, such as insulting the national flag, the Constitution of India, or preventing the singing of the national anthem, face a six-year ban from contesting elections at both the Parliament and state legislature levels.
To maintain integrity during elections, the sale and distribution of alcohol or intoxicants are prohibited in polling areas for 48 hours leading up to the closing of polls. This rule aims to prevent any disturbances or bribery that could arise from alcohol consumption during this critical time.
Regarding the nomination process, any candidate wishing to contest in a Parliamentary or assembly seat must have their nomination supported by at least ten voters from their constituency unless they are backed by a recognized political party, in which case only one supporter is needed. This rule is designed to ensure that only serious candidates partake in elections.
The reforms also addressed the issue of a candidate's death before polling day. Previously, if a candidate died, the entire electoral process in that constituency would be halted and restarted. Now, if a contesting candidate dies before polling, the election will continue as planned. However, if the deceased candidate was from a recognized party, that party has the option to nominate another candidate within a week.
Concerning by-elections, they must now take place within six months of a vacancy occurring in either the Parliament or the state legislature. However, there are exceptions to this rule. For instance, if less than a year remains in the term of the departed member, or if the Election Commission, in consultation with the central government, decides holding a by-election is challenging, the six-month rule does not apply.
Moreover, voters who are registered and employed have the right to a paid holiday on the day of the election to ensure they can participate in the voting process, including daily wage workers. However, this rule doesn't apply to individuals whose absence from work might result in significant danger or loss.
Another notable reform is the limitation of candidates contesting elections from no more than two constituencies, whether in general elections or by-elections held simultaneously. This restriction also applies to biennial elections and elections for the Rajya Sabha and state legislative councils.
To ensure security during voting, entering the vicinity of a polling station with firearms of any kind is now considered a serious offense. However, this restriction does not extend to election officials such as returning officers or police officers who are present to maintain order.
Lastly, the time allowed for effective campaigning has been shortened. The gap between the last date for candidates to withdraw their nominations and the polling day has been reduced from 20 days to just 14 days, allowing for a more efficient electoral process.
These electoral reforms reflect India's continual efforts to enhance the democratic process, promoting transparency and integrity in elections. They are fundamental in ensuring that the rights of voters are protected and that the electoral process remains fair and just, as laid out in various articles of the Indian Constitution, such as Article 326, which guarantees the right to vote, and Article 324, which empowers the Election Commission to oversee free and fair elections.
Electoral Reforms After 1996 Presidential and Vice Presidential Elections
The Indian electoral system has seen various important changes after the 1996 elections to make the process clearer and more efficient. Many of these reforms were introduced to ensure fairer elections and enhance voter participation.
In 1997, significant changes were made regarding who could propose and second candidates for the President and Vice President positions. The number of electors needed as proposers increased from 10 to 50 for the President, and from 5 to 20 for the Vice President. This was done to limit the number of frivolous candidates and make sure that those who stand for election have substantial support. Moreover, the security deposit required to contest these elections also rose significantly, from ₹2,500 to ₹15,000, further discouraging unserious candidates. These changes are in line with Article 58(2) and Article 63 of the Indian Constitution, which outline the eligibility criteria for elections to the offices of President and Vice President.
In 1998, a new rule was established allowing employees of local bodies, nationalized banks, universities, and other governmental institutions to be called for election duty. This was aimed at improving the management of elections by having more accessible manpower.
A year later, in 1999, the Election Commission introduced the option of postal voting for specific classes of individuals, such as military personnel and voters who might face obstacles in reaching polling booths. This was an essential step to ensure that everyone had the opportunity to vote regardless of their circumstances.
In 2003, the government granted the option for service voters, specifically those from the Armed Forces, to vote through a proxy. This meant that these voters could appoint someone to cast their vote on their behalf, ensuring that they could still participate in elections even when they were stationed away from their constituencies.
Additional transparency measures were introduced in the same year, requiring candidates for Parliament or State Legislatures to disclose their criminal background, financial assets, and educational qualifications. They were mandated to report whether they had faced any criminal convictions or pending charges, as well as provide details about their financial situation. This move aimed to inform voters and reduce corruption in politics. If candidates provided false information in their declarations, it was classified as an election offense under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Changes were also made to the elections for the Rajya Sabha (the upper house of Parliament) in 2003. The prior requirement that candidates must be registered voters in the state from which they were contesting was removed. Now, candidates could be voters in any parliamentary constituency across India. Additionally, the voting method was changed from a secret ballot to an open ballot system to reduce the influence of money and encourage fair voting practices.
To further promote fair elections, any travel expenses incurred by campaign leaders on behalf of candidates were exempted from the total campaign expenses reported by those candidates. Moreover, candidates from recognized political parties were guaranteed free access to electoral rolls and other crucial information to support their campaigns.
In 2003, the rules regarding contributions to political parties were relaxed, allowing these parties to accept donations from individuals or businesses outside of government companies. However, contributions over ₹20,000 needed to be reported to the Election Commission for tax relief. This legislation was covered under the Income Tax Act of 1961, promoting transparency in political financing.
The Election Commission was also tasked in 2003 with ensuring equitable access to electronic media during campaigns. This meant that time on television and other platforms was allocated based on the past performance of political parties to ensure fair exposure.
Accessibility for voters with disabilities was also addressed. The Election Commission responded to requests for Braille signage on Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) to assist visually impaired voters. Testing of these features began as early as 2004 and was expanded in subsequent elections to help all eligible voters participate in the democratic process without assistance.
In summary, the electoral reforms introduced after the 1996 elections were aimed at encouraging transparency, accessibility, and fairness within India’s electoral framework. These reforms highlight the government's commitment to empower all citizens, ensure fair election processes, and ultimately strengthen Indian democracy. The changes align with various articles of the Indian Constitution, primarily in the Representation of the People Act of 1951, which governs elections and electoral conduct in India.
Electoral Reforms in India Since 2010
Electoral reforms in India aim to improve the electoral process and ensure fair and transparent elections. Since 2010, several important changes have been introduced in Indian election laws and practices. This overview will touch on some of the key reforms instituted during this period, drawing from relevant articles and laws in the Indian Constitution and related legislation.
One of the major changes pertains to exit polls. According to a rule introduced in 2009, conducting exit polls and reporting their results during elections for the Lok Sabha (House of the People) and State Legislative Assemblies is prohibited. This measure is intended to prevent any potential influence on voters' choices before they cast their votes. The term "exit poll" refers to surveys that attempt to gauge how voters have voted or to predict the outcome of an election.
In addition, the process for disqualifying candidates found guilty of corrupt practices was simplified. A three-month deadline was established for the relevant authority to present the case against a guilty individual to the President of India. This ensures that cases of disqualification are handled promptly and efficiently, as outlined in Article 102 and Article 191 of the Constitution.
Changes were also made regarding the inclusion of officials in corrupt practices. Under a 2009 provision, all officials, whether in government roles or appointed by the Election Commission, can now be implicated if they assist a candidate in a corrupt manner.
Security Deposits for Candidates
The amount of security deposits required from candidates contesting elections was increased significantly in 2009 to reduce the number of non-serious candidates. For instance, the deposit for Lok Sabha candidates rose from ₹10,000 to ₹25,000 for general candidates. Similarly, state assembly candidates now need to pay ₹10,000 instead of ₹5,000. This change encourages serious contenders and discourages frivolous entries into the electoral race.
Appellate Authority and Voting Rights Improvements
In a move to enhance accessibility, an appellate authority was established at the district level to hear appeals against decisions made by Electoral Registration Officers. These provisions allow for greater local oversight and quicker resolutions of disputes related to voter registrations.
Furthermore, in 2010, voting rights were granted to Indian citizens living abroad, as long as they retained their Indian citizenship. This measure allows expatriates to register to vote in their home constituencies.
Online Voter Registration and NOTA
In 2013, the government made online applications for voter registration possible. This initiative facilitates easy access for voters to get registered. In the same year, the “None of the Above” (NOTA) option was introduced, allowing voters to express their dissatisfaction with all candidates. This option is particularly important for maintaining the integrity of the voting process and was a direct result of the Supreme Court’s directions.
Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT)
The VVPAT system, introduced to ensure the integrity of electronic voting, allows voters to verify their choices. When a vote is cast, a paper slip prints out showing the chosen candidate’s details for the voter to verify before it is stored securely. This system was phased in following the Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling to strengthen the democratic process and ensure fair elections.
Changes in Candidate Eligibility and Conviction Disqualifications
In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that legislators convicted of crimes would automatically lose their positions without a grace period for appeals. To uphold the electoral process, changes were introduced to allow individuals in jail or police custody to contest elections, thus ensuring that their legal status does not automatically disqualify their candidacy.
Moreover, starting in 2015, Election Commission orders mandated that candidates' photographs be included on ballot papers and electronic voting machines (EVMs) to reduce voter confusion, especially when candidates have similar names.
Reforms in Campaign Funding
Several reforms were introduced regarding political funding. In 2017, the limit on anonymous electoral donations was significantly decreased to ₹2,000, while corporate contributions were deregulated, allowing companies to donate any amount to political parties. The introduction of Electoral Bonds in 2018 aimed to enhance transparency in political funding, allowing donations through a financial instrument without disclosing the donor’s identity publicly.
Recent Legislative Changes
The Election Laws (Amendment) Act, 2021, introduced several key reforms, including linking voter data to the Aadhaar system to eliminate duplicate registrations and allowing all service voters' spouses to vote. This amendment moved towards further inclusion and efficiency in the electoral process.
These reforms highlight India’s commitment to evolving its electoral processes to ensure fairness, transparency, and inclusiveness in democracy. By continually working on these reforms, India aims to strengthen its democratic foundation and engage more citizens in the electoral process.