Karti Chidambaram says SC's conscience pricked over ECI functioning

Congress MP Karti Chidambaram said the Supreme Court's conscience has been 'pricked' after it sought clarity from the ECI on modifying Form 6 and on allegations that key decisions were taken unilaterally by the Chief Election Commissioner.

SC's Conscience 'Pricked' Over ECI Functioning, Says Karti Chidambaram

Congress MP Karti Chidambaram on Monday said the “conscience of the Supreme Court has been pricked” amid growing concerns over the functioning of the Election Commission of India (ECI), after the apex court sought clarity on the modification of Form 6 and allegations that key decisions relating to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) were taken unilaterally.

The Supreme Court on Monday made it clear that it had not approved any modified version of Form 6, which is used for enrolling new voters during the SIR exercise.

“Finally, the conscience of the Supreme Court has been pricked. There has been very serious disquiet in civil society, in political circles, among the young and among citizens at large about the functioning of the Election Commission of India,” Chidambaram said while speaking to ANI.

'Unilateral' Decisions Make ECI Actions Illegal: Chidambaram

“There have been many issues that are being raised. One is the functioning of the Election Commission of India. Is it being done according to the Constitution?...Are decisions being taken by consensus or by majority, or are they being taken unilaterally, as we suspect, by the Chief Election Commissioner?” he said.

“If that is the case, every decision is an illegal decision. Every action of the Election Commission would be deemed to be illegal,” the Congress MP alleged.

Supreme Court Seeks 'Authenticated Information'

His remarks came after a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana refused to pass an ex-parte interim order seeking suspension of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The court issued notices to the Centre, ECI, Kumar, Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi and other officials. The court said it first wanted “authenticated information” on the allegations and observed that any decision found to have violated the statutory framework could be annulled.

On Form 6, CJI Surya Kant said, “Any modified Form 6 has not been approved by us. Let's be clear. When the record is produced, we would like to see who has modified.”

Concerns Over Voter Enrollment and Deletion Forms

Chidambaram questioned how the changes to the form were introduced.

“Then there comes the issue of both Form 6 and Form 7. Form 6 is used to enrol a new voter. There have been changes to the format of Form 6. Questions regarding the voting history of parents and grandparents are being asked. Nobody's right to vote is dependent on whether their parents voted or not. Nobody's right to vote is dependent on whether their grandparents voted or not,” he said.

“There have been some very serious changes and questions added to Form 6, which many have been questioning. How did these changes happen? Was this taken unanimously by the Election Commission? Did the government, the executive, approve it? Now the court itself is asking how these changes were made,” he added.

He also criticised the SIR exercise, calling it “a very exclusionary process and not an inclusionary process”.

“The entire focus should be on enrolling people who are eligible to vote in a constituency. But, of course, you must rectify and verify the list. But the entire focus of the SIR, the way it has been engineered and the way it has been implemented, is to exclude people,” Chidambaram said.

“It is, in fact, doing the exact opposite of what the Election Commission should do,” he added.

The Congress MP also raised concerns over the use of Form 7, alleging that it was being used for mass objections against voters.

“Form 7 was not meant for some mass deletion by some busybody political activist. In Karnataka. There is one person belonging to the BJP who has filed 7,000-plus Form 7 objections against voters in that constituency,” he alleged.

“People who have been voting for multiple elections suddenly find that somebody anonymous is objecting to their right to vote. The people of India have lost confidence in the functioning of the Election Commission,” he said.

Criminal Writ Petition Filed Over ECI's Actions in West Bengal

Advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, who has also raised allegations concerning the ECI's functioning, said he had filed a criminal writ petition concerning appeals filed in West Bengal.

“I filed a criminal writ petition...approximately 16 lakh appeals were filed on behalf of the Election Commission in West Bengal; however, the two Election Commissioners had raised objections regarding the basis on which these appeals were filed,” Tripathi said.

“I demanded the constitution of an SIT to investigate these actions—which effectively amounted to a fraud committed against voters in defiance of the law—and to initiate prosecution against those found liable,” he added.

Tripathi said a next date had not yet been fixed for his petition and that the court would proceed after receiving responses from the respondents.

The petition before the Supreme Court has alleged that 14 crucial SIR-related decisions were taken in the name of the ECI despite objections recorded by the two other Election Commissioners. The matter also involves allegations concerning changes to electoral-roll systems, Form 6, access to ERONet/ECINet and appeals filed before West Bengal Appellate Tribunals.

The Supreme Court has maintained that it would examine the allegations after receiving authenticated records and responses from the concerned authorities.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)