Tharoor rejected the arguments in favour of simultaneous polls that it would lessen the burden on the exchequer and that governance comes to a grinding halt due to a continuous election cycle
Published Date – 09:49 PM, Wed – 11 October 23
File Photo
New Delhi: With a high-level committee exploring the possibility of conducting simultaneous elections, senior Congress leader Shashi Tharoor on Wednesday said he does not see it as a feasible reform and asserted that reducing the number and frequency of polls would be “undemocratic”.
He made the remarks during a panel discussion at the launch of former chief election commissioner SY Quraishi’s book titled ‘India’s Experiment with Democracy: The Life of a Nation Through its Elections’.
Tharoor rejected the arguments in favour of simultaneous polls that it would lessen the burden on the exchequer and that governance comes to a grinding halt due to a continuous election cycle.
“Now, the prime minister (Narendra Modi) argues that it (continuous election cycle) is more expensive. There is a study done by the NITI Aayog…after we dug this up we found out that the cost was Rs 5,000 more per voter if elections were not simultaneous. This is not a sum that the Indian exchequer cannot absorb,” the MP from Thiruvananthapuram said.
“Even more troubling is the other argument that governance comes to a grinding halt. Frankly, that is not anyone’s fault but that of the ruling party’s,” the Congress leader said.
Tharoor said that the prime minister and the home minister have chosen to be the “principal campaigners” in every state poll and municipal election in a big city.
“They don’t have to, it is not their job, the PM’s job is to run the country not to win elections for his party. The honest truth is that this is a way to press gang the system into a uniformity…we are a diverse country, we are a country with a number of different traditions, political cultures, every state has its own story,” he said.
Even if somehow, by artificially shortening some terms or expanding some terms of assemblies, elections are held together once, what would prevent all of these governments falling again, he argued.
“Your only solution would be to keep president’s rule until the next election cycle which is undemocratic. Which surely would be violative of the basic principles of the Constitution. I don’t see this is a feasible reform, let alone whether it is desirable or not because as I said once the mirror has cracked you cannot piece it together and get an accurate reflection,” Tharoor said.
He stressed that elections are actually the only vehicle for holding governments accountable for their performance, and therefore, reducing their number and frequency is “undemocratic” because the more elections are held, the more opportunity one has to register his or her views about the government in a concurrent way.
Referring to remarks of eminent jurist Fali Nariman, who was also a panelist, on increasing trend towards presidential system, Tharoor said, “In some way, Fali sahab, a presidential system would be more honest because at least you would have an independent legislature. Right now we have worst of both the worlds — a parliamentary system being run presidentially and Parliament is completely toothless.” Responding to Tharoor, Nariman quipped, “In a presidential system you won’t be able to hold a meeting like this.” Tharoor added that the presidential and parliamentary forms was a completely different debate.
The panelists hailed Quraishi for his book, published by HarperCollins India, that looks at the history, processes and politics of elections in India.
Quraishi said holding of simultaneous polls has both pros and cons but pointed out that people love elections.
The phenomenon of accountability of MLAs and MPs and the people getting importance during polls was a major factor in favour of elections taking place repeatedly, he said.
The government had on September 2 notified the eight-member “high-level” panel to examine and make recommendations at the earliest on the issue of holding simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha, state assemblies, municipalities and panchayats.
During the discussion, Tharoor also talked about the perception of reduced neutrality of the Election Commission, alleging that there have specifically been lapses on the part of the poll panel that have given rise to concerns.
“When you read in the newspapers that the three election commissioners have been summoned for a meeting with the principal secretary to the prime minister and they actually go without saying ‘sorry it is not your business to
summon us’, when you read that in 2017 Gujarat elections, which had been historically been announced with two other state elections, are not announced to permit the PM to go and announce a few more freebies before the election dates.
“When you read about the Lavasa controversy when you hear that one election commissioner seeks to dissent and then is packed off to Manila. There is example after example like this. There has been as a result a perception that the Election Commission has been behaving more and more like the handmaiden of the government rather than an
independent body it is meant to be,” Tharoor said.
It is very striking that previous governments actually valued the independence of the Election Commission which was always headed by a retired bureaucrat, he said.
“Preferred formula of the present government is that the third member (of the collegium for selection) far from being an independent justice of the Supreme Court, is going to be a cabinet minister, named obviously by the PM. These are questions that are troubling,” Tharoor said.
“We have even seen during elections that complaints are made about specific speeches made by candidates which are violative of the poll code, where speeches made by every other parties is wrapped on the knuckles and somehow even the Home Minister is able to make a flagrantly offensive speech, complaints are immediately issued and no action is taken by the Election Commission,” the Congress leader said.
