`Why so haste’: Congress questions midnight move of appointing new election commissioner

New Delhi: In a midnight move the union government has appointed the new central election commissioner which goes against the spirit of the Constitution said Congress on Tuesday morning.

Gyanesh Kumar has been appointed as the new chief election commissioner by the central government. He is an 1988-batch IAS officer, currently the senior election commissioner, who played a role in key policy decisions including abrogation of Article 370 and other important cases of Supreme Court. He retired as secretary of the Cooperation Ministry in 2024.

Congress K C Venugopal, general secretary of All India Congress committee says, " In a hasty midnight move, the Government has notified the appointment of the new Central Election Commissioner. This goes against the spirit of our Constitution, and what has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in many cases - for the electoral process to have sanctity, the CEC must be an impartial stakeholder. The amended law removed the CJI from the CEC selection panel, and the government ought to have waited until the Supreme Court’s hearing on 19th February before selecting the CEC."

Dissent note by Leader of Opposition

Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi in a dissent note said, "During the meeting, I presented a dissent note to the Prime Minister and Home minister stating that the most fundamental aspect of an independent Election Commission free from executive interference is the process of choosing Election Commissioner and Chief Election Commissioner. By violating the Supreme Court order and removing the Chief Justice of India from the committee, the Modi Government has exacerbated the concerns of hundreds of millions of voters over the integrity of our electoral process. As the LoP it is my duty to uphold the ideals of Babasaheb Ambedkar and the founding leaders of our nation and hold the government to account. It is both disrespectful and discourteous for the PM and HM to have made a midnight decision to select the new CEC, when the very composition of the committee and the process is being challenged in the Supreme Court and is due to be heard in less than forty-eight hours."

Why circumvent SC?

Congress has raised objections asking why the decision was hastily taken. The government is keen to circumvent the Supreme Court’s scrutiny and get the appointment done before a clear order kicks in. Venugopal says, " Such egregious behaviour only confirms the doubts that many have expressed about how the ruling regime is destroying the electoral process and bending the rules for its benefit. Be it fake voter lists, schedules favouring the BJP, or concerns around EVM hacking—the government and the CECs it appoints are subject to deep suspicion because of such incidents."

Congress said that the Leader of Opposition has pointed out that the decision should have been kept aside til the Supreme Court decides the issued in accordance with the principles of Constitution.

Congress has questioned the government’s haste in holding the meeting for selecting the Chief Election Commissioner, when the matter related to the composition of the selection committee is pending in the Supreme Court and is listed for February 19.

Congress party treasurer Ajay Maken, senior leader Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, and Gurdeep Sappal pointed out that the Chief Election Commissioner and the Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Office, Terms of Office), Act 2023, have been challenged in the Supreme Court of India.

Dr Singhvi said the committee constituted by the Act, creates a partisan and non-neutral mechanism for the selection of Election Commissioners.

He said, the current Committee, consisting of the Prime Minister, the Union Home Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha, is in clear and direct violation of the Supreme Court’s Judgement of March 2, 2023, where a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India declared that the CEC and the ECs should be appointed by a Committee comprising of the PM, the LOP and the Chief Justice of India.

Quoting the court observation, Dr Singhvi said, the SC had observed that “the Executive alone being involved in the appointment, ensures that the Commission becomes and remains a partisan Body and a branch of the Executive. The independence of the Commission is intimately interlinked with the process of appointment.”

He pointed out that the court had also observed, “to allow independence in the functioning of the Election Commission as a Constitutional body, the office of Chief Election Commissioners as well as the Election Commissioners have to be insulated from the executive interference.”

Dr. Singhvi observed, “This (existing) Committee which has been purposefully balanced, or unbalanced if we may say so, with a two-third vote being given to the Centre directly offends these clear and precise caveats of the Supreme Court of India. It is therefore neither bona fide in its purpose nor constitution”.

He said, the Supreme Court, in its judgment regarding the Election Commission, had stated that “an independent appointment mechanism would guarantee eschewing of even the prospect of bias.”

The senior Congress leader maintained that the “Constitution of this Committee suggests that the objective of the Central Government is to the opposite. It wants to ensure the creation of a Committee that will only allow the appointment of such candidates that will never threaten its existence”.

“Why else would the Supreme Court’s direction to have the Chief Justice on the Committee be dropped?” he asked. “No answer has been given, either within Parliament or outside."

The Congress leaders suggested that the Central Government adjourn this meeting until after the hearing in the Supreme Court and instruct its counsels to appear and assist the court so that the hearing may be an effective one.