In response to the growing concerns about the integrity of India’s 2024 General Election (GE), the IPMIE constituted an independent panel to monitor and observe the General Election 2024.

IPMIE stated in its statement that we set out to monitor all aspects of the election process, with the goal of ensuring transparency and fairness. During the GE period, IPMIE published weekly bulletins and three in-depth reports documenting violations of electoral integrity.

IPMIE stated that during the election, we observed and highlighted several violations of electoral integrity with the Election Commission of India (ECI). In our final briefing paper i.e. “Electoral Integrity in India an Agenda for Change: Learnings from the 2024 General Election”, we reflect on those violations, namely;

”1. Electoral procedure and alleged infractions in vote counting. The absence of adequate cross-verification between EVMs and VVPATs – the insistence on non-counting of VVPATs by design – may have facilitated large-scale, spurious injections of votes during each of the seven phases of voting. After analysing discrepancies between provisional and final vote tallies released by the ECI, experts alleged that elections may have been ‘stolen’ in as many as 79 parliamentary constituencies. Several reported instances from across the country of bogus voting and other voting day infractions, as well as widespread complaints of manipulation and other malpractices by ECI officials lent credence to these concerns.

2. Voting registration and allegations of voter exclusion and suppression: State-led voter suppression measures were reported from Gujarat (where hundreds of Muslim fishermen were reportedly struck off from voter rolls), Uttar Pradesh (where dozens of voters in Muslim- concentration villages were reportedly physically assaulted and restrained from voting by policemen), Jammu & Kashmir (where policemen detained party workers and activists unlawfully) and Assam, where around 100,000 residents had in the past been designated as ‘doubtful voters’ by the ECI.

3. Party financing and abuse of state agencies to deny level playing field: Data relating to electoral bonds appeared to confirm the BJP’s near-monopoly over political financing. There was also evidence to suggest that the BJP may have been involved in quid pro quo relationships with corporate donors, many of whom had secured lucrative government contracts, subsidies, and other forms of government support. Ahead of and during the GE period, central government agencies were systematically mobilised to target key parties and leaders of the INDIA bloc of opposition parties.

4. Sectarian rhetoric and media coverage: Throughout the election period, the BJP, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, engaged in sectarian rhetoric on a hitherto unprecedented scale. At least 287 instances of hate speeches (including 61 by Modi) have been documented. The BJP’s core narrative demonised Muslims (who were referred to as ‘infiltrators’ and ‘jihadis’, among other dehumanising terms). Television broadcast networks continued to be highly partisan in favour of the BJP, and ‘shadow advertisers’ pushing a coordinated disinformation campaign on social media networks, seemingly on behalf of the BJP.

5. Electoral authority: The ECI appeared largely to act like an arm of the government, refusing to take decisive action against violations of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and of electoral laws by ruling party members. The ECI’s conduct throughout the election process reflected a systematic abdication of its constitutional obligation to conduct free and fair elections. Efforts by opposition parties, election watch bodies and citizens groups, as well as by us as independent experts, to address the many concerns to ECI, went largely unheeded.

6. Lack of electoral redress: The performance of India’s higher judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court (SC), during the 2024 GE was mixed. While it outlawed electoral bonds in February 2024 and ensured the release of related data, its response to petitions seeking remedies related to various electoral integrity weaknesses – including the new appointments procedure to the ECI, weaknesses in the EVM-VVPAT system, communal campaigning by BJP leaders, and the ECI’s delay in publishing voter turnout data – was inadequate.’

Raising concern over the Lok Sabha Election 2024 and on the basis of recommendations, IPMIE urged Indian Authorities to implement the following recommendations:

“1. Amend electoral laws, including sections of the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act and the Model Code of Conduct to strengthen the independence of the Election Commission of India and empower it, prevent gerrymandering in future delimitation processes, allow judicial review of election-related decisions, ensure the public disclosure of all financial contributions received by political parties, and root out corruption.

2. Strengthen Electoral processes to ensure the voting process is verifiable and transparent, that civil society has a role in revising and updating draft electoral rolls, and that data pertaining to EVMs and the election overall is made available in real-time.

3. Ensure the Election Commission of India is brought under the direct oversight of Parliament, that its appointment procedures are revised to guarantee cross-party inclusion, and that it is granted enhanced powers to proactively regulate political parties and to impose stricter election- time penalties for violations of the MCC.”

However, in February 2024, a group of experts from diverse disciplines, from multinational backgrounds, all with pride and admiration in the promise that India holds for inclusive democracy – constituted the Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (IPMIE), 2024, to observe and report on General Election 2024, as independent civil society monitors. The members of the Panel are, Prof. Neera Chandhoke, Distinguished Honorary Fellow, Centre for Equity Studies, and retd. Professor, Delhi University, India, Dr. Thomas Daffern, Philosopher and historian; chairman of World Intellectuals Wisdom Forum; Director, International Institute of Peace Studies and Global Philosophy (France and UK); Convenor, Commonwealth Interfaith Network, Mr. Sakhawat Hossain, former Election Commissioner of Bangladesh, Dr. Harish Karnick, former Professor, IIT, Kanpur, India, Dr. Sebastian Morris, former Professor, IIM, Ahmedabad, India and, Prof. Rahul Mukherji, Professor & Chair, Modern Politics of South Asia, South Asia Institute, Heidelberg University, Germany

The Press Statement of IPMIE can be read here:

The Full Report can be read here:

The post IPMIE released “Electoral Integrity in India an Agenda for Change: Learnings from the 2024 General Election” appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Citing Data in Parliament in relation to the unstarred question asked by Shive Sena (UBT) MP Priyanka Chaturvedi on the booth capturing complaints received by the Election Commission in the last five year, the number of people arrested, and action taken by ECI with regards to such complaints, Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal stated that 14 people arrested who were part of the Booth Capturing. Sharing details in a written reply, he said one complaint was received from Arunachal, 2 from Odisha where simultaneous polls to Lok Sabha and assembly were held.

Minister said that that Chief Electoral Officer, Arunachal Pradesh was instructed to take fresh poll and was further instructed to direct the concerned Returning Officer to initiate swift action/investigation in the case. A case has been registered at Khenwwa Police Station, East Kameng District. The case is under investigation. One person is still under judicial custody.

In relation to Bihar, it was cited that all complaints were found false on verification and were disposed off. In Odisha 12 persons were apprehended and served notice under Section 41 of Criminal Procedure Code. However, a re-poll at two polling stations i.e. 26-Kirasiraand and 28-Maheswarpinda under the 85-Kantamal Assembly Constituency had been successfully conducted

Interestingly, in relation to the 875 complaints registered highest in West Bengal, Union Law Minister noted in parliament that no cases were substantiated against those complaints and were disposed of as per the report of the concerned District Electoral Officer, Superintendent of Police/Commissioner of Police.

Vote for Democracy, Maharashtra also in its report highlighted the Parliamentary Constituencies where booth capturing took place but no affirmative action has been taken by the Election Commission of India till date.

The Answer of the Minister can be read here:

Related:

Vote for Democracy (VFD) releases report on the conduct of General Election 2024

Bihar: RJD’s petition booth capturing and rigging at Munger dismissed by SC

Phase 6 Polling: Reports of voting manipulation and sporadic violence continue, AAP claims “slow voting” in Delhi

The post 925 Complaints of Booth capturing in Elections 2024 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The single judge bench of Justice Sandeep Marne at the Bombay High Court has issued notice to Shiv Sena’s returned candidate Ravindra Waikar on July 29 while hearing a plea seeking declaration of his election as a Returned Candidate to Mumbai North West Lok Sabha constituency as “void”. The response to the notice has been made returnable on September 2. The petition was filed by Shiv Sena – Uddhav Bal Thackeray (UBT) candidate Amol Kirtikar, who lost by a narrow margin of 48 votes in the seat, and sought setting aside of Waikar’s victory and asked the court to declare himself a winner to the seat. The petition maintained that while Kirtikar was leading in the seat with 1 vote more than Waikar after the counting of EVM votes, the contested counting of Tendered Votes and Postal Ballot Votes resulted in Waikar taking over the lead with 48 votes in the end.

Notably, Kirtikar asserted in the petition that as per his election agents he was leading by over 650 votes at the conclusion of EVM vote count, however, the Returning Officer (RO) announced that he was only 1 vote ahead in terms of EVM votes at the end of all 26 rounds, based on the entries made in Form 20. He alleged that their requests for recount was rejected by the RO.

The plea raised several issues with regard to the conduct of elections and particularly the counting of votes by the Returning Officer (RO) and alleged violation of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, and guidelines issued under the Handbook for Returning Officer, 2023.

The petition highlighted the following concerns and violations of the statutory laws:

1. Kirtikar alleged that his counting agents were not permitted to sit at the ARO / RO Table, despite being a statutory requirement under the RPA.
2. Form 17-C (Part II), which records total votes received by each candidate, was not given to his agents in any of the 563 polling booths of 2 Assembly Segments (158 – Jogeshwari and 164 – Versova) and 276 polling booths of another Assembly Segment (163 – Goregaon).
3. No reasonable opportunity was provided to make an application requesting re-count of votes and the RO turned down the written request subsequently made.
4. Unauthorized usage of mobile phone inside the counting area, including by the RO, in violation of the RPA and the RO Handbook.
5. Impersonation of electors resulting in 333 votes being cast as ‘Tendered Votes’ which went uncounted.
6. Discrepancy in the number of ‘Tendered Votes’ recorded in ‘Form 17-C (Part – I) – Account of Votes Recorded’ by the Presiding Officer and ‘Form 20 – Part – II – Final Result Sheet’ recorded by the Returning Officer.

Furthermore, Kirtikar pointed out in the petition that even after several representations were made to the Returning Officer and the District Election Officer (DEO) seeking supply of CCTV recording of the entire counting process, the same was rejected by the DEO in violation of “Clause 19.10 of the 2023 Handbook which unambiguously states that copies of the said video recordings shall be provided upon payment of fees.”

In particular, with regard to the irregularities in the counting of votes, the plea claimed that the “process of counting, announcement and screen display was done up to the 19th round. Thereafter, from the 20th to 25th rounds, the votes were not announced or displayed and nearing the end of the counting, the votes in respect of 20th to 26th rounds came to be announced.” Kirtikar also maintained that CCTV recording would reveal that between 19^th and 26^th rounds, the RO “continuously” walked off stage and “seemed to be continuously interacting on her mobile phone” in violation of the provisions of the RPA and Election Handbook for the Returning Officer, 2023. Additionally, the plea further maintained that one of the ENCORE operators had lent his mobile phone to one Mr. Mangesh Padilkar, who happens to be a relative of the Returned Candidate, “and the latter in turn was using the same illegally at the counting place”, following which the FIR was registered against Padilkar.

On the issue of discrepancy in account of Tendered Votes, the petition claimed that as per Form 17-C (Part-1) there are 333 Tendered Votes, however, in Form 20, “which is supposed to record the number of ‘tendered votes’ based on Form 17-C (Part I)”, only 213 Tendered Votes are recorded. It said that in the past, Tendered Votes have been counted in similar circumstances and “the non-counting of such votes has materially affected the result of the election.”

Based on these allegations, Kirtikar has asked the Bombay High Court to declare the election of Waikar as a Returned Candidate to be void “under Section 100(1)(d)(iii) and (iv) of the R.P. Act, 1951” and declare the petitioner instead as the winner “in terms of Section 84 r/w Section 101(a) of the R.P. Act, 1951”.

Related:

M’tra: Shiv Sena UBT’s Amol Kirtikar from Mumbai NW alleges election manipulation, files complaint with CEC, SEC | SabrangIndia

FIR filed against relative of winning candidate in mumbai north west election over alleged protocol breach | SabrangIndia

How vote splitting by VBA shapes Maharashtra election outcomes 

The post Bombay HC issues summons to Shiv Sena’s Ravindra Waikar on the petition filed by Shiv Sena (UBT)’s Amol Kirtikar challenging the former’s victory from Mumbai North West Lok Sabha seat appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Vote for Democracy (Maharashtra) released its comprehensive election report on the conduct of Lok Sabha elections 2024 during an event organised on July 22 at YB Chavan Centre in Mumbai. The publication, titled, “Report: Conduct of Lok Sabha Elections 2024 – Analysis of ‘Vote Manipulation’ and ‘Misconduct during Voting and Counting’”, describes the alleged malpractices committed during the election cycle, the role of the Election Commission of India and Returning Officers, discrepancies reported between EVM votes polled and count, and vote hikes (“dumped” votes) per phase-wise, state-wise, and nationally. The report underlines that in total 5 crore votes were hiked (“dumped”) between initial voter turnout and final turnout, suggesting that the hike disproportionately helped the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA).

The press release issued by VFD notes that “serious questions have been raised about the discrepancies between the total votes polled and votes counted, as well as, substantial unexplained hike in the turnout percentages by the Election Commission of India (ECI). While we do not doubt the credibility of the ECI, its conduct during this Lok Sabha election has made us, as citizens and voters, seriously concerned about the fair outcome of the electoral process.”

The report, in total containing 4 chapters, analyses through a series of tables the possible manipulation of election results, which it suggests has helped the ruling dispensation increase its seats tally in spite of total reduction in its seats tally. In order to help candidates identify the potential malpractice(s) in a constituency, the report has attached a checklist for figuring out the possible manipulation(s). Furthermore, as a legal resource, to emphasise on the integrity of the election process, the report also provides relevant judicial precedents and election laws, which are fundamental to the governance of election in a free and fair manner. In particular, the malpractices affecting the election outcomes in Mumbai North West and Farrukhabad parliamentary constituencies have been detailed in the publication.

Questioning the Election Commission

While highlighting the electoral malpractices, delay in declaration of initial turnout figures, and substantial hike in final turnout figures, VFD critiqued the Election Commission of India (ECI) for its silence on these issues. Flagging the delay in release of initial turnout figures and unexplained hike in the final turnout figures, the report says that for Phase 1 “The ECI did not explain as to why there was a substantial hike in the final figures, nor did the poll body explain the long delay (11 days!) in releasing the final figures and that too in percentages only.” It further said that ECI has not answered any specific questions regarding the jump in final voter turnout and discrepancies between EVM votes polled and count till date. The report also claimed that some candidates were either denied or not issued Form 17C, which records the accounts of votes polled at the end of the polling day.

Vote hike benefit ruling alliance

VFD observed that the substantial hike in final voter turnout compared to initial turnout data suggests that the ruling dispensation has benefitted most likely from these hikes. The report says that “it is pertinent to note that by this method of Voter turnout Hike in this Phase 2, there has been a sharply beneficial results for the NDA/BJP: in most of the states e.g. West Bengal 3/3, Uttar Pradesh 8/8, Madhya Pradesh 6/6, Chhattisgarh 3/3, Tripura 1/1, Jammu and Kashmir 1/1, Karnataka 12/14, Rajasthan 10/13 and Assam 4/5. Such a trend is not seen in the other 6 Phases of Polling including in the same states of West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka, Rajasthan. In this Phase 2, the example of Kerala is unique in that the BJP in this Phase got one seat, stood 2nd in another seat and 3rd in other 14 out of a total of 20 seats in the state! There appears to be a clearcut manipulation here.” Furthermore, it said that close to 5 crore vote hikes has benefitted BJP/NDA to secure at least 76 seats, which it may have lost in the absence of such hike.

In particular, three tables, displaying the list of all the Parliamentary Constituencies (PCs) where the winning margin/defeat margin has been under 1 lakh vote; where the discrepancies have been found between the EVM votes polled and EVM votes recovered within the defeat margin of 50000 votes or less; and shortlisted table containing constituencies where alleged malpractices have been reported are given in the report. Apart from these, more than a dozen tables are provided analysing several aspects of voter turnout hike, hike in absolute number of votes, and potential malpractice.

Conclusion

The report notes that “Vote for Democracy (VFD) is a Maharashtra-level citizens’ platform comprising individuals and organisations, established in 2023. Our mission is to ensure voter registration, raise voter awareness, and promote hate-free elections where accountability and transparency are paramount.” The findings of the study, it said, has been dedicated to citizens, civil society, activists and political leaders. Explaining the rationale behind the exercise, VFD said that umpteen media reports flagging the conduct of General Elections 2024 led it to conduct a thorough study of the electoral conduct on part of the Commission and analysis of the election exercise and final results.

While releasing the VFD Lok Sabha 2024 report, Teesta Setalvad said that the primary need to release the report came from the concern regarding manipulation of votes apart from the inaction of the ECI over several infringement of poll code and election laws during the conduct of general election, including its silence on the issue of hate speech.

MG Devasahayam noted that voters rights to know, a fundamental democratic principle, was violated by the conduct of the Election Commission. He remarked that the ECI committed fraud on the people of India by blatantly ignoring the Supreme Court directions, making subsequent corrections in the uploaded data, refusing Form 17C to some of the candidates, and remaining absent during the entire election cycle. Furthermore, he said that selective variation of votes has been observed in at least 80 constituencies and circumstantial evidence suggests manipulation of votes, resulting in the mandate being snatched away from the people. He also flagged other issues, including ballot paper manipulations, lack of CCTVs in the strong room, changing of EVM machines, and manipulation in data released.

Sebastian Morris observed that compared to the challenges faced while using ballot papers, EVMs are more vulnerable to being manipulated and given the decline in independence of constitutional bodies, this raises serious concerns. Morris said that right from the election of the ECI members, to selective interventions on violation of election rules, the behaviour of the ECI has been a sham. He also commented on the issue of delay in release of voter turnout data and subsequent hikes reported in such data and further noted that in as many as 79 seats, the hike in number of votes has been more than victory margins.

Dr. Harish Karnick, a retired IIT Kanpur Professor, said that ECI’s refusal to conduct complete cross-verification of EVM votes and with VVPAT remains unjustified, especially given the unexplained delay in the release of initial turnout data and subsequent hike in final turnout data. Dr. Karnick maintained that from the whole VVPAT fiasco to the erosion of the voter’s right to know who they voted for, there are records of these manipulations but no answers. He emphasised on the point that EVMs have exacerbated existing certain gaps in the electoral process, and ECI seems to have exploited those gaps.

Following on the grievances and issues raised in the said report, a joint legal notice was sent to the ECI by the members of the various civil society groups on July 18. The notice which was addressed to the Chief Election Commissioner, Rajiv Kumar, and Election Commissioners, Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, demanded the following interventions from the ECI:

1. Thorough investigation into the issues raised and the irregularities/illegalities pointed out in the Notice for the information of the voting public who are the real stakeholders in any election.
2. Immediate remedial action on all the issues raised.
3. Setting aside the election of the illegally returned candidates on grounds of non-compliance with the provisions of the Constitution or of RP Act or of any rules or orders made under this Act.
4. Immediate registration of FIR Under Section 129 of the RPA 1951, Section 65,66,66F of the IT Act, 200 and IPC Sections 171F/409/417/466/120B/201/34 and investigation into the roles of all involved, including ECI officials, BEL and ECIL engineers, and beneficiary parties.
5. Countermanding the election in the constituencies where large-scale spurious injection of votes have taken place as per the list in Annexure and ordering re-election.
6. Passing such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in upholding integrity and fairness of the elections for the future also.

Full Report is available on https://votefordemocracy.org.in

The post Vote for Democracy (VFD) releases report on the conduct of General Election 2024 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

As a result, we are witnessing yet another phase of coalition government at the Centre. For the last ten years, the Central Government has been dominated by one party and one leader. However, the recent positive changes are being lamented by the mainstream media. If the views expressed by establishment-backed writers in the media are anything to go by, an impression is being created that the era of coalition politics may hamper the growth rate and be an obstacle to “strong” economic reforms.

In what follows, I would critique such a top-down approach and argue that a coalition government is good for democracy and it is conducive to strengthening the rights of the people because it creates multiple centres of power and does not easily allow one party or person to dominate the political field.

But first, we need to differentiate democracy from majority rule. The RSS and the BJP are desperate to consolidate the majority of Hindus on religious grounds and forge a “communal” majority, but such a trend is antithetical to the democratic spirit. To understand this, we need to go back to Babasaheb Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.

Almost a century ago, when Dr. Ambedkar was active in politics, he anticipated the looming threat from the Hindu Right to India’s democracy. Addressing the Annual Session of the All-India Scheduled Castes Federation held in Bombay on May 6, 1945, Ambedkar spoke in unambiguous terms: “Much of the difficulty over the Communal Question is due to the insistence of the Hindus that the rule of majority is sacrosanct and that it must be maintained at all costs.”

The approach which was opposed by Dr. Ambedkar is what the BJP has done in the last ten years. Any criticism of the wrong policies of the Modi Government was rejected by the Hindu Right, saying that the BJP had the numbers while the Opposition had lost the legitimacy by losing elections.

But unlike the majoritarian logic of the RSS and the BJP, Ambedkar was quite clear that in a democracy, the government was formed by majority votes, but that did not mean that the rights of the minorities would be trampled under the strong heel of majoritarianism or the brute force of numbers. He said that “no one community is placed in a position to dominate others because of its numbers.”

Ambedkar was bang on target in defining the true spirit of democracy. For a true democrat like him, the protection of the rights of minorities, which include both religious minorities and those who are historically oppressed and socially marginalized, is a key feature of democracy. Babasaheb was aware of the danger of upper-caste-led communal majoritarianism, masquerading itself as “nationalism,” which, in turn, demonizes the legitimate demands of marginalized groups and their political mobilization as “communal” assertion. The way AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi is attacked by the Hindu Right every day makes Ambedkar’s words prophetic.

Two years later, Ambedkar wrote a small pamphlet, which was nevertheless a powerful document called States and Minorities, where he exposed the myth of communal majoritarianism, legitimizing itself in the form of nationalism and democracy. Look at his perceptive words, “Unfortunately for the minorities in India, Indian Nationalism has developed a new doctrine which may be called the Divine Right of the Majority to rule the minorities according to the wishes of the majority. Any claim for the sharing of power by the minority is called communalism while the monopolizing of the whole power by the majority is called Nationalism.”

If we keep in mind the insightful words of Ambedkar, we can easily see through the discomfort and anxieties of the Hindu Right and their cadre-writers with coalition politics. Contrary to the democratic spirit, the Hindu Right believes and acts on the doctrine of ‘might is right’. Similarly, they are allergic to the idea of sharing power with Bahujans such as Dalits, Adivasis, OBCs, and religious minorities. They are not ready to accept the fact that the basic difference between authoritarian rule and democracy is the question of power. For example, an authoritarian rule is non-democratic because it, unlike democracy, refuses to share power with marginalized groups.

To put it differently, an authoritarian ruler decides everything on his own. He is unwilling to listen to criticism and dissent. Under his regime, there is an absence of multiple sources of power, and the system of checks and balances has collapsed. The due procedures and the rule of law are not in place. The mechanism of dialogue and consensus has been uprooted. The freedom of the press, the independence of the judiciary, and the proportional and effective representation of minorities are anathema to the ears of the authoritarian ruler. Such tendencies could also find a leader, sweeping through the elections in majoritarian waves.

Contrary to this, a democratic system is not only the name of elections, although free and fair polls are very important. Nor is the sign of democracy merely the formation of the government and the celebration of the high growth of the economy. A true democracy, in fact, is one where the rights and interests of weaker sections and the marginalized are protected. For example, in a caste-based society like ours, the leaders from a particular section cannot be entrusted to safeguard the interests of all. Even if good policies and laws are in place, unless the people from the marginalized sections are placed in a position to implement them, these “good” laws themselves may not be effective in ensuring their rights.

Thus, participation and decentralization are the buzzwords in a democratic setup. Where the formation of the government is based on multi-party systems, authoritarian tendencies are kept in check. In electoral systems where many parties are in competition, it is likely that the political parties will offer more welfare schemes to the voters.

Unfortunately, the previous decades of Indian politics, particularly in the Centre, have been dominated by one party and one leader. This has led to the decline of consensus-building, an important feature of democracy. The previous Modi-led governments at the Centre have violated the true spirit of federalism. The last two tenures of the Modi Government were far more aggressive than the previous regimes in trampling the genuine concerns of marginalized groups and regions. Recently, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee wrote a letter to Prime Minister Modi, expressing her disappointment that the government of West Bengal was not included by the Union Government while discussing the water dispute with Bangladesh. Even if it is conceded that the Union Government was able to protect the interests of India, it is still undemocratic to exclude the regional government from the talks.

From the present era to the conflicts in the past, it is evident that the failure to share power with minorities and make decisions based on dialogue and consensus created a human tragedy of untold magnitude. From the Punjab crisis to the problems in the northeast, Jammu and Kashmir, and the southern states, the heart of the problem lies in the failure of the top leaders to share power with other stakeholders. That is why the mourning over coalition politics is uncalled for and undemocratic as well.

Before I conclude, let me appeal to the critics of coalition politics to look at the functioning of the new tenure of the Modi Government. They should not miss the positive changes. The failure of the BJP to get a majority, coupled with the significant gains made by the opposition parties, has somewhat democratized the functioning of the government. After a gap of ten years, we have in Parliament the Leader of the Opposition, questioning the failure of the government. While the law says that the numerically largest party in the Opposition should be invited to give the Leader of the Opposition to the House, an excuse that the opposition party should have at least 10 percent of the total strength of the House was used to deny the Lok Sabha of having the Leader of the Opposition.

It should not be a matter of concern but a source of joy that in Parliament, the voices of the opposition leaders are now loud. Similarly, the allied partners of the BJP, who were nowhere in the photo frame, are now seen sitting close to Modi. These changes are all due to the return of coalition politics. However, it is not being argued that all is well. But it also cannot be overlooked that the scenes from post-June 4, 2024, onwards are far more beautiful than those from 2014 to 2024.

(Dr Abhay Kumar is an independent journalist. He is interested in social justice and minority rights. Email: debatingissues@gmail.com)

The post Why coalition politics is good for democracy appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In the Lok Sabha elections in Maharashtra in 2024, the people gave a remarkable 30 of the 48 seats to the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA-INDIA), an increase of 25 seats compared to 2019; voters gave only 17 seats to the NDA, a drop of 24 seats. An independent Congress rebel has won, and he has officially returned to the Congress, making the MVA total 31 out of 48 seats. Three Union Ministers of the BJP were defeated, along with 20 sitting MPs from the BJP-NDA.

The number of seats won and the votes secured by each party in Maharashtra in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections is telling: MVA-INDIA – Congress – 13/17 seats (16.9 %), Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray) – 9/21 seats (16.7 %), NCP (Sharad Pawar) – 8/10 seats (10.3 %). NDA – BJP – 9/28 seats (26.1 %), Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde) – 7/15 seats (13 %), NCP (Ajit Pawar) – 1/4 seats (3.6 %), Rashtriya Samaj Party – 0/1 seat (0.8 %).

While these are certainly welcome developments, the voting percentage of the two fronts is far too close for comfort. For MVA-INDIA the percentage of voter support stands at 44 %, and for a while for the NDA it is 43.6 %.

In sharp contrast, the 2019 Lok Sabha election result for 48 seats was as follows: NDA – 41 seats (51.34 % votes), BJP – 23 seats (27.84 % votes), SS – 18 seats (23.5 % votes), UPA – 5 seats (32.01 % votes), NCP – 4 seats (15.66 % votes), INC – 1 seat (16.41 % votes), AIMIM (Aurangabad) – 1 seat (0.73 % votes), Independent (Amravati, later pro-BJP) – 1 seat (total of all independents and other smaller parties 3.72 % votes), Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi (VBA – Prakash Ambedkar) – 0 seats (6.92 % votes), Total – 48 seats (100 % votes).

The MVA fought the 2024 election with its back to the wall. Under pressure of the Modi regime, the Election Commission of India (ECI) gave both the name of the party and its symbol to the rebel SS and NCP factions led by Eknath Shinde and Ajit Pawar respectively. The original parties led by Uddhav Thackeray and Sharad Pawar were forced to take new election symbols. Money and media power were obviously largely controlled by the BJP. But the MVA fought back unitedly with grit and determination, and the people supported it.

The Maharashtra Lok Sabha results are even more significant because the state faces its Vidhan Sabha elections within just three more months, in October 2024.

A preliminary analysis of the Maharashtra Lok Sabha election results will reveal the following seven main reasons for the NDA setback and the MVA victory.

Corrupt and immoral Acts by BJP

First, the people were sick of the BJP and its corrupt and immoral acts in the state in the last two years, which resulted in the splits in the SS, and then in the NCP, and then again nibbling at some of the Congress leaders. Over 80 MLAs out of the 100-odd MLAs of the SS and the NCP together were induced to support the BJP by using a combination of threats and blandishments. It was through such dirty conspiracies that the discredited Shinde-Fadnavis-Ajit Pawar state government was brought into existence. The corrupt and unprincipled splintering of the SS and NCP led to a big sympathy wave for their original leaders and parties.

In such a situation, the veteran NCP leader of many battles Sharad Pawar, SS leader Uddhav Thackeray, and INC leader Nana Patole, spearheaded the resistance of the people against this political chicanery, and strengthened the unity of the MVA, which was further buttressed by the formation of the INDIA bloc at the national level. In the 2019 Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabha elections also, Sharad Pawar had played a salutary role of fighting against the BJP.

The most high-profile Lok Sabha election contest in Maharashtra this time was between Sharad Pawar’s daughter Supriya Sule, and Ajit Pawar’s wife Sunetra Pawar. Supriya Sule won by over 1.5 lakh votes. MVA leaders addressed scores of huge public meetings in their election campaign. In several constituencies, it became like an election of the people against the BJP.

Economic distress and struggles against this   

The second factor was clearly economic distress. The growing crisis in unemployment, inflation, agrarian distress, education, health, food security, and other sectors, and also the growing struggles on these issues in the state over the last few years, played a major part in ensuring the alienation of the people from the BJP-NDA.

In the agrarian sector, the falling prices of onions, cotton, soya bean, sugarcane, and milk, became a major issue. So also were the recurring droughts, unseasonal rains, and hailstorms, for which no relief was forthcoming. The anger of the scheme workers and other unorganised sections was palpable. On all these issues, there were sustained independent struggles and strikes by peasant and worker organisations in Maharashtra. As a result, the issue of economic distress had repercussions in all the regions of the state. As against the election campaign by Modi, Shah, Yogi, Nadda, Fadnavis, and other BJP leaders who only tried to create and intensify communal polarisation, the MVA-INDIA election campaign concentrated on these burning issues of the people.

Caste and reservations

The third factor was that of caste, and reservations. This was a direct result of the agrarian crisis and burgeoning unemployment. In the Marathwada region, where the Maratha quota stir was the most intense, the BJP could not win even a single of the eight MP seats in the region. In other regions also this issue hit the BJP. Another significant feature of this election was the massive support of Muslims and other minorities to the MVA-INDIA bloc. This support also extended to the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray) group, because of it being a part of the MVA along with the Congress and the NCP, and also because Uddhav Thackeray as Chief Minister and later, had taken a balanced stand, which was the exact opposite of his father.

Spoilers checkmated

The fourth factor was the people themselves partly isolating the traditional spoilers like the Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi (VBA) led by Prakash Ambedkar, and the AIMIM led by Asaduddin Owaissi. Although the VBA put up its candidates in around 35 Lok Sabha seats, unlike in 2019, it could not fully achieve its desired aim of helping the BJP win. In the Akola Lok Sabha seat in Vidarbha, which Prakash Ambedkar himself contested, he came third behind the BJP and the Congress. In three other seats also, viz. Buldhana, Hatkanangale, and Mumbai North West, the votes polled by the VBA were more than the victory margins of the BJP-NDA candidates. In the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, the VBA had helped the BJP-NDA to win in 11 seats.

Attack on Maharashtrian identity and pride   

The fifth factor was the attack on Maharashtrian identity and pride. In the past few years, a large number of industries and projects which had been earmarked for Maharashtra were arbitrarily shifted to Gujarat by the Modi regime. This was a source of great heartburn, because it adversely affected employment and development. On top of that, in his election speeches in Maharashtra, Modi insulted MVA leaders by calling Sharad Pawar a “bhatakti aatma” (wandering soul). He also called Uddhav Thackeray’s Shiv Sena a “nakli” (fake) Sena. All this was naturally seen by the people as insulting Maharashtrian identity and pride. This issue had big repercussions throughout the state.

Stiff competition to ‘Godi Media’ 

The sixth factor was that, even so far as the media is concerned, this time several popular independent media outlets and YouTube channels were seen by lakhs of people, giving a stiff competition to the corporate Godi media, and exposing its increasing loss of credibility. Also, several social organisations came together and hit the streets by organising their own public meetings and other imaginative programmes under different banners, like the ‘Nirbhay Bano Andolan’, ‘Nirdhar Maharashtracha (Determination of Maharashtra)’, and so on. With the encouraging poll results in the country and the state, this trend is sure to intensify in future.

Defence of democracy, secularism, and constitution    

And the seventh and last factor was, of course, the paramount issue in this whole election throughout the country – the defence of democracy, secularism, and the Constitution. The ‘400 paar’ slogan of the BJP was rightly interpreted by large sections of the people as showing its malignant intention to change and destroy the Constitution, and attack the rights given therein to the economically exploited and the socially oppressed. This became a major issue for Dalits, because Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar is regarded as one of the prime architects of the Constitution of India. But it was not an issue only for Dalits. It influenced large sections of the patriotic people in the state and the country. And the MVA-INDIA election campaign rightly concentrated on this issue. This concerted campaign had the desired impact.

Role of the Left

So far as the CPI(M) and the Left were concerned, the MVA did not leave any seat for them in the seat sharing, in spite of their concerted efforts. In the two seats of Dindori (ST) in Nashik district and Palghar (ST) in Palghar district, the CPI(M) has a mass base of around one lakh votes each. It also has a reasonable presence in some other seats. But the Party avoided fighting these seats outside the MVA, since it would have divided the secular vote and helped the BJP to win. CPI(M) activists all over Maharashtra did good and sustained work to ensure the victory of several MVA candidates. This was warmly acknowledged by the top leadership of the MVA itself. It is expected that the CPI(M) and the Left will contest some seats as part of the MVA in the coming state assembly elections.

After this salutary victory in the Lok Sabha elections, the MVA-INDIA bloc will have to be even more vigilant, and redouble its efforts and its inclusivity to throw the BJP-NDA out of power in the ensuing Vidhan Sabha elections in Maharashtra which will take place in October 2024.

(The author is Member, CPI (M) Polit Bureau and National President, All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia. 

Related:

M’tra: A blow to BJP-NDA, a shot in the arm for MVA-INDIA

The post Lok Sabha polls 2024, M’tra: Blow to BJP-NDA, boost for MVA-INDIA appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The debacle of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde)-Nationalist Congress Party (NCP-Ajit Pawar) combine (MahaYuti) in the western Indian state of Maharashtra was despite and in spite every effort to trick the voter into confusion.

Never has been the voter’s faith in the electoral process been at such an all-time low. The questionable conduct of the Election Commission of India (ECI) in a) failure to act against the brazen incitement and use of religion during the campaign by star campaigners like the Prime Minister and others from the ruling BJP; b) the ECI’s hostile and unaccountable behaviour in not releasing the figures of the Form-17C (that gives the total of votes polled from every constituency within 48 hours of the poll) and c) general hostile attitude towards the opposition and civil society increased scepticism and anger.

Before the onset of the poll process in March 2024, the obviously partisan behaviour of the ECI in awarding original party status to the breakway Shiv Sena and NCP rather than the original generated further resentment. Finally, during the recent electoral debacle in Maharashtra’s Lok Sabha constituency significant concerns regarding the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) allocation of election symbols have also come to light.

In the Maharashtra’s 2024 elections, splits within major political parties like the Shiv Sena and the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) created significant voter confusion due to changes in party symbols. While the SS (UBT) was tasked with conveying to its loyal voter base that the bow and arrow needed to be overlooked for the new symbol of torchlight (Mashaal), NCP (SP) had to ensure that their voter base did not go for the Clock (Ghadiyal) but pressed the EVM button on the Tutari (man with the trumpet. However, after polling day came and went and counting day ensured that NCP(SS) romped home with 8 of the 10 seats in the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi Alliance (MVA), the near certain Satara seat was lost because of another smbol of just a trumpet was also awarded to a rival candidate.

This phenomenon was particularly evident in four critical constituencies: Satara, Dindori, Shirur, and Baramati, where voters struggled to identify their preferred candidates’ symbols. This confusion impacted voting outcomes and highlighted deeper issues within the state’s political landscape.

Was the ECI actions in awarding visually similar or interchangeable symbols right in the eyes of law and the Constitution or juridically questionable violating the basic principles of free and fair elections in a democracy?

What conspired in Satara?

In Satara the similar symbol confusion cost the NCP (SP) one Parliamentary seat. In the 2024 Lok Sabha elections for the Satara constituency, the NCP (Sharadchandra Pawar faction) fielded Shashikant Jayvantrao Shinde, whose symbol was a man blowing a tutari (trumpet). Meanwhile, an independent candidate, Gade Sanjay Kondiba, was allotted a tutari (trumpet) symbol. The similarity between the symbols allegedly caused confusion among voters, contributing to the defeat of Shinde by a margin of 32,771 votes to BJP’s Udayanraje Bhonsle[1]. Patil claimed that the allocation of similar symbols was a deliberate attempt to split votes, which is a serious allegation that warrants a thorough legal examination[2]. The confusion over similar symbols could well have cost the NCP (SP) one seat.

Kindly embed this tweet here:

D confusing symbol in election plays spoilsport role. Sharad Pawar’s NCP (SP) nominee Shashikant Shinde lost LS polls due to this only. Shinde lost by 33,000 votes while proxy symbol having independent nominee got 37,000 vote. In other seats, proxy symbol reduced victory margin. pic.twitter.com/1t2Dd7FUHH

— Sudhir Suryawanshi (@ss_suryawanshi) June 7, 2024

What conspired in Dindori[3]?

In Dindori, the confusion over symbols was also palpable. In the Dindori constituency, an independent candidate named Babu Sadu Bhagre, who had a similar name and symbol to Bhaskar Bhagre from the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), caused a significant stir. Bhaskar Bhagre was running against the sitting MP, Bharti Pawar from the BJP.

Babu Bhagre, although largely unknown and not a teacher (despite using “sir” in his name), started getting a lot of votes from the beginning. His symbol was a ‘Tutari’ (trumpet), which looked very similar to the NCP’s symbol, confusing voters.

After four rounds of vote counting, Bhaskar Bhagre was leading by 6,989 votes, but Babu Bhagre had already collected 12,389 votes. By the end of the counting, Babu Bhagre had over 103,632 votes. Despite this, Bhaskar Bhagre managed to win with 577,339 votes, beating Bharti Pawar by 113,119 votes.

Narhari Zirwal’s support for Bhaskar Bhagre, despite recently crossing over to Ajit Pawar’s faction, added another layer of complexity. Voters found it difficult to keep track of the political realignments and symbol changes, leading to potential mis-votes. This situation in Dindori exemplified the broader state-wide confusion, where voters’ long-standing associations with specific symbols were disrupted, necessitating intensive educational campaigns that were not always successful.

What conspired in Shirur[4]?

In Shirur, the electoral confusion was similarly pronounced. Amol Kolhe from the NCP (Sharad Pawar) was pitted against Adhalrao Patil from Ajit Pawar’s NCP. Reports indicated that senior voters accidentally voted for the clock symbol, traditionally associated with Sharad Pawar, but now representing Ajit Pawar’s faction. This error stemmed from muscle memory and deeply ingrained voting habits.

Despite Sharad Pawar’s faction’s efforts to educate voters about the new tutari symbol, many still inadvertently supported the rival faction. Campaigns involved using placards and real tutaris to familiarize voters with the new symbol, but these measures were not entirely effective. The voters’ confusion in Shirur underscores the challenges of shifting symbol recognition and the significant impact on voter behavior and election outcomes. Fortunately the outcome was not affected, and Dr. Amol Ramsing Kolhe of the Nationalist Congress Party – Sharadchandra Pawar won with 6,98,692 votes, second came Adhalrao Shivaji Dattatrey of the Nationalist Congress Party with 5,57,741 votes and the independent candidate with the tutari symbol Manohar Mahadu Wadekar came third with 28,330 votes.

Kindly embed this tweet here:

I voted. But observed a disturbing trend.

The problem is that the BJ Party has muddied the waters in MH by design. I belong to the Shirur constituency where Amol Kolhe (NCP-Sharadchandra Pawar, with INDIA bloc) was against Adhalrao Patil (NCP-Ajit Pawar, with NDA).
1/n

— Kedar Anil Gadgil (@KedarAnilGadgil) May 13, 2024

What conspired in Baramati[5]?

Baramati saw the peak of symbol confusion, with Supriya Sule from Sharad Pawar’s NCP competing against her sister-in-law Sunetra Pawar from Ajit Pawar’s faction. The outcome was however not affected. Supriya Sule of the Nationalist Congress Party – Sharadchandra Pawar won with 7,32,312 votes, second came Sunetra Ajit Pawar of the Nationalist Congress Party with 5,73,979 votes and third came the independent candidate with the tutari symbol Mahesh Sitaram Bhagwat who gathered 15,663 votes.

The situation was further complicated by the presence of an independent candidate who was allotted a symbol similar to the tutari, leading to additional voter confusion.

Despite extensive campaigning by Supriya Sule’s team to make voters aware of the new tutari symbol, traditional voters who had long associated the clock symbol with the NCP accidentally voted for Ajit Pawar’s faction. This confusion split the vote and demonstrated the deep-rooted challenges of re-establishing party identity amidst changing political symbols. The voter misalignment in Baramati highlighted the broader issue of symbol recognition in the face of political realignments.

Legal Violations and procedural failures in the allocation of election symbols by the ECI

The Election Commission of India’s (ECI) allocation of a man blowing a tutari to the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) candidate and a tutari to an independent candidate in the Satara constituency, changing the symbol from the clock to the tutari and allotting the clock to other candidates in Baramati and Shirur constitutes a violation of Paragraph 4 of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968[6].

This provision requires the allocation of “distinct symbols to different candidates in the same constituency to prevent voter confusion,” which clearly occurred in Satara and Dindori as voters likely mistook the independent candidate’s tutari symbol for the NCP candidate’s symbol, leading to a misallocation of votes.

Moreover, paragraph 4 requires that symbols allotted to a recognized party should be frozen and preserved during a split until the Election Commission or a court resolves the matter. In Shirur and Baramati, the emergence of a new symbol without clear guidance on symbol preservation for the different factions within the NCP may have contributed to voter confusion. This confusion was exacerbated in Baramati by the presence of an independent candidate using a symbol similar to the tutari, further complicating the electoral landscape and potentially violating the spirit of symbol reservation and allotment rules.

Furthermore, this allocation reflects a misclassification under Paragraphs 5 and 6, which distinguish between “reserved” and “free” symbols. Reserved symbols are meant to preserve the unique identity of recognized political parties in the electoral process. By permitting an independent candidate to use a symbol so similar to that of a recognized party, the ECI blurred this critical distinction, diluting the party’s identity and confusing the electorate, thereby undermining the intended purpose of these provisions.

Article 324 of the Indian Constitution vests the ECI with the responsibility to ensure free and fair elections. The alleged deliberate allocation of similar symbols to cause voter confusion stands in stark contrast to the mandate of Article 324. The ECI’s primary role is to maintain the integrity of the electoral process, and actions that compromise this integrity violate the spirit of this constitutional provision.

Section 123(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951[7] defines corrupt practices, including undue influence. The allocation of similar symbols can be perceived as a tactic to confuse voters, constituting undue influence. The significant number of votes that went to the independent candidate with the similar symbol in various constituencies, as cited by NCP leader Jayant Patil, suggests that voters were misled. This misdirection of votes not only affects the fairness of the election but also undermines the democratic process.

This act also contravenes the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961[8], specifically Rules 5 and 10, which empower the ECI to specify, reserve, and allot election symbols. These rules are intended to ensure clarity and fairness in the symbol allocation process, preventing voter confusion and guaranteeing that each candidate is distinctly represented by their symbol. By disregarding these rules and allowing symbols that are strikingly similar, the ECI undermined the fundamental purpose of these provisions, leading to a compromised electoral process where voters were misled, thus failing to uphold the principles of fair and transparent elections.

The election symbols, did the exact opposite of what they were supposed to do: they created more confusion, which led to people voting for the opposite party.

Free and Fair Elections: The cornerstone of democracy

Free and fair elections are the bedrock of any democratic system. They ensure that the will of the people is accurately reflected in the composition of the government. The sanctity of elections is protected by laws and regulations that seek to prevent any undue influence or manipulation. The Supreme Court of India, in the case of People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) vs. Union of India[9], reinforced this principle by holding that democracy is a part of the basic structure of our Constitution and that free and fair elections are integral to this structure. The court emphasized that any action undermining the fairness of elections would be detrimental to the democratic framework of the country.

The Model Code of Conduct (MCC) is a set of guidelines issued by the ECI to regulate political parties and candidates prior to elections. It aims to ensure that elections are conducted in a free and fair manner and that no party or candidate gains an unfair advantage. However, the conduct of ECI in the Maharastra constituencies suggest a blatant violation of the MCC by the commission itself. By allowing similar symbols and confusing symbols to be allocated, the ECI has failed to uphold the principles of the MCC, which it is mandated to enforce.

In Union of India vs. Association for Democratic Reforms[10], the Supreme Court reiterated that the rule of law and the right to free and fair elections are basic features of democracy. The court stressed that electoral malpractices and undue influence over voters must be prevented to preserve the integrity of the electoral process. The actions of the ECI in the Satara case seem to contradict this judicial mandate by creating a scenario where voter confusion was inevitable.

The Broader Implications

The integrity of the electoral process hinges on the trust of the electorate. When voters are presented with symbols that are similar or are confusing, their confidence in the system’s fairness is undermined.

The confusion caused by the allocation of a “man blowing a tutari” symbol to the NCP candidate and a “tutari” symbol to an independent candidate in Satara likely led to voters being unable to accurately distinguish between the candidates. This not only happened in Satara but four other constituencies. This misallocation of votes can result in feelings of disenfranchisement and suspicion towards the electoral authorities, thereby eroding trust. When voters perceive the electoral process as flawed or manipulated, their willingness to participate in future elections diminishes, which is detrimental to the functioning of a healthy democracy. Ensuring that every vote accurately reflects the voter’s intent is crucial for maintaining public trust and upholding the legitimacy of elected officials.

The implications of the ECI’s actions extend beyond this single instance. If the issue of (deliberately allocated) similar symbols is not addressed, and that too soon, it establishes a dangerous precedent that could be exploited in future elections.

Other political entities may adopt similar strategies, deliberately selecting symbols that closely resemble those of their opponents to confuse voters and split votes. This tactic could become a pervasive form of electoral manipulation, complicating the voting process and increasing the incidence of contested elections. Such practices not only disrupt the immediate electoral outcomes but also contribute to a longer-term degradation of electoral integrity. Over time, if such practices are not curbed, the overall credibility of the electoral system may be compromised, leading to widespread disillusionment and disengagement among voters.

The Maharashtra cases underscores a critical need for more precise regulations regarding the allocation of election symbols. The ECI must take proactive steps to ensure that symbols assigned to candidates are distinct and easily distinguishable to prevent any confusion among voters. This could involve revising the criteria for symbol allocation and implementing stricter guidelines to avoid any overlap or similarity between symbols. Furthermore, enhanced scrutiny during the symbol allocation process could help identify and rectify potential issues before they impact the election.

Clearer regulations would also empower candidates and political parties to raise objections more effectively when they believe that the assigned symbols are likely to cause confusion. By setting and enforcing stringent guidelines, the ECI can safeguard the electoral process, ensuring that voters can make informed decisions without ambiguity. This approach would help maintain the clarity and transparency essential for free and fair elections, reinforcing the democratic principles on which the electoral system is based.

Conclusion: Upholding democratic integrity

To uphold democratic integrity, it is imperative for the ECI to implement stricter regulations and more robust guidelines regarding the allocation of election symbols. Symbols must be distinct and easily distinguishable to prevent any possibility of voter confusion. Additionally, the ECI must engage in proactive voter education campaigns, especially when there are significant changes in party symbols due to political realignments. Voters need to be clearly informed about these changes to ensure that they can make informed decisions at the ballot box.

Ensuring the clarity and transparency of the electoral process is essential for maintaining public trust in democracy. The voters’ confidence that their votes will be correctly attributed to their chosen candidates is fundamental to the legitimacy of elected officials and the overall functioning of a democratic system. By addressing the issues highlighted in Maharashtra’s 2024 elections, the ECI can reinforce this trust and safeguard the democratic framework of the country.

In conclusion, the ECI needs to immediately take decisive action to rectify the symbol allocation process and prevent future electoral confusion. Upholding the principles of free and fair elections is not just a constitutional mandate but a moral imperative to preserve the integrity of India’s democracy. By ensuring that every vote is accurately counted and reflects the true intent of the voter, the ECI can uphold the sanctity of the electoral process and maintain the foundation of a robust democratic society.

[1] https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/similar-poll-symbols-led-to-skewed-results-ncp sp/article68260814.ece

[2] Maharashtra: Similar poll symbols led to defeat in Satara, says NCP(SP) (scroll.in)

[3] https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/pune/maharashtra-dindori-unknown-candidate-garnered-99000-votes-9371782/

[4] https://scroll.in/article/1068006/bow-and-arrow-or-torch-in-maharashtra-confusion-over-new-election-symbols-may-help-bjp-allies

[5] https://scroll.in/article/1068006/bow-and-arrow-or-torch-in-maharashtra-confusion-over-new-election-symbols-may-help-bjp-allies

[6]https://upload.indiacode.nic.in/showfile?actid=AC_CEN_3_81_00001_195143_1517807327542&type=order&filename=Election%20Symbol%20Order,%201968.pdf

[7] https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/2096/5/a1951-43.pdf

[8] https://old.eci.gov.in/files/file/15145-the-conduct-of-elections-rules-1961/

[9] People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) vs. Union of India, (2003) 2 S.C.R. 1136

[10] Union of India vs. Association for Democratic Reforms (2002) 5 SCC 294

Related:

From counting of votes by the rule book to respecting the mandate of the people, transparency and integrity is key: People’s Organisations, Delhi.

Protect Electoral Democracy, defend the Constitution and the law: Judges to President of India, Chief Justice of India and ECI

ECI Press conference ahead of polling day, BJP puts its two bits in, concerns on counting of postal ballots etc. remain

Why Indian exit polls are often biased and favour the ruling party

ECI’s Handbook for Police Officers and RP Act 1951: For Pre-Poll, Polling Day, and Post-Poll Responsibilities

The post M’tra: Similar Symbols, a failed ECI and seats lost: the case of Satara appeared first on SabrangIndia.

He has further stated that there is reason to believe that there has also been tampering with the Electronic Voting Machines. The successful candidate Mr. Ravindra Waikar has polled 4,52,644 votes and Kirtikar polled 4,52,596 votes. He is therefore at Serial No. 2, i.e. immediately behind the candidate declared winner. Kirtikar is also in the process of challenging the aforesaid election in Court.

Significantly, in this communication he has drawn attention to Paragraph 76 of the Judgement passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Association for Democratic Reforms VS Election Commission of India and Ors.  Copy of which is enclosed herewith. Paragraphs 76 (a) and 76 (b) of the said judgement are reproduced as under:-

76. Nevertheless, not because we have any doubt, but to only further strengthen the integrity of the election process, we are inclined to issue the following directions:

(a) On completion of the symbol loading process in the VVPATs undertaken on or after 01.05.2024, the symbol loading units shall be sealed and secured in a container. The candidates or their representatives shall sign the seal. The sealed containers, containing the symbol loading units, shall be kept in the strong room along with the EVMs at least for a period of 45 days post the declaration of results. They shall be opened, examined and dealt with as in the case of EVMs.

(b) The burnt memory/microcontroller in 5% of the EVMs, that is, the control unit, ballot unit and the VVPAT, per assembly constituency/assembly segment of a parliamentary constituency shall be checked and verified by the team of engineers from the manufacturers of the EVMs, post the announcement of the results, for any tampering or modification, on a written request made by candidates who are at SI.No.2 or Sl.No.3, behind the highest polled candidate. Such candidates or their representatives shall identify the EVMs by the polling station or serial number. All the candidates and their representatives shall have an option to remain present at the time of verification. Such a request should be made within a period of 7 days from the date of declaration of the result.

Kirtikar has therefore exercised his right towards “checking and verification of the burnt memory/microcontroller i.e. the control unit, ballot unit, the VVPAT, the microprocessor and the software loading unit by the team of engineers from the manufacturers of the EVMs.” He has also state dearly that he would like to remain present at the time of the aforesaid checking/verification.  Therefore, he has required adequate written notice in order to enable me or my representative to be physically present when the said checking/verification is scheduled to take place.

Most significantly, and this is crucial to transparency activists and election watchers concerned that the election process is free and fair, Amol Kirtikar has also requested for a copy of the Technical SOPs issued by the Election Commission of India pursuant to specific directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 26 April 2024.

Whilst he and his team have accessed the Administrative SOP, the Technical SOP guaranteeing the integrity of the SLU (symbol loading unit) and microprocessor is not accessible on the ECI Website.  It is this SOP that will ensure and guarantee due observance of directives of the Supreme Court of India.  Interestingly, one of these Administrative SOPs was issued on April 29, 2024 after the first two phases of polling had already taken place, the second one is dated June 1, 2024 i.e. the last phase of polling.

Experts have told Sabrang India that the Administrative SOPs issued by the Election Commission of India (ECI) pursuant to extremely critical and contested proceedings before the Supreme Court of India (SCI) in no way strictly ensure that the storage of these units will be safe and secure. This issue could also be a matter of serious challenge in the near future.

Kirtikar has lodged a complaint on several counts even on the day of counting itself, i.e. June 4, 2024 and these issues will be subject matter of the election petition that is required to be filed within 45 days.

Meanwhile media reports on June 10 that the Vanrai police are investigating allegations from losing candidate Amol Kirtikar that man close to his rival might be involved in foul play. A  “mysterious mobile phone” found on vote-counting day at the NESCO centre has kicked up a controversy, with the Shiv Sena (UBT) candidate, Amol Kirtikar, who lost by only 48 votes, accusing his rival, Shiv Sena MLA Ravindra Waikar, of manipulating poll results. An ECI staffer found in possession of the device, banned inside counting centres, is under scrutiny while police are scrutinising the phone’s call records.

Waikar won the hotly contested Mumbai North West seat by a mere 48 votes. According to Kirtikar, the voting was stopped by a representative inside the NESCO centre between 3.30 pm and 5.30 pm when he was leading by 651 votes. He alleged that the results were unaccountably then declared, stating that he had lost the contest by 48 votes.

SOP dated April 29, 2024

ECI SOP dated June 1, 2024

Supreme Court Judgement dated April 26, 2024

Insert Kirtikar’s letter to the Election Commission of India, demanding a probe into mysterious presence in the booth

Related:

My June 4 Story: The Day Results to the 2024 Elections came in

How vote splitting by VBA shapes Maharashtra election outcomes

Unboxing the Inbox: Decoding the “Viksit Bharat Sampark” Controversy and its Shadow over Indian Elections

Rising tide of hate speech marks India’s general assembly election campaigns

The post M’tra: Shiv Sena UBT’s Amol Kirtikar from Mumbai NW alleges election manipulation, files complaint with CEC, SEC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

So, I do have a June 4 story that began in 1989 when Rajiv Gandhi lost the election, which I covered as a cub reporter at 21. “Covered” is presumptuous. I was more or less zipping around Trivandrum on a two-wheeler gifted by a friend, reporting “untoward incidents” for Venad Pathrika, the afternoon newspaper I was working for then. Again, it was an election that would turn fateful for the country that sent me to Calcutta.

After the journalism course at the Times School in Daryaganj, I had been shortlisted for The Economic Times in Bangalore but I was reluctant, having contracted typhoid from the southern city during a two-month internship with The Times of India and generally unable to find anything of interest there. The only open slot then was Jaipur Times of India, an edition that faced the somewhat unique and unfortunate threat of “cannibalism”. The Times of India Delhi edition, probably the best newspaper in the country then with a powerhouse of talented journalists, would reach Jaipur by around 10am or before that, and many readers in Jaipur would prefer to wait rather than take the Jaipur edition, which meant the biggest competitor of The Times of India in Jaipur was The Times of India from New Delhi! But that was not a factor for me.

I had been schooled that journalists should pursue journalism, not what circulation managers do. I was willing to go to Jaipur (anything to escape Bangalore) when my classmate who was earmarked for Calcutta Economic Times landed a position in a US university. Calcutta badly wanted a trainee because of the elections of May 1991. Delhi asked for volunteers and my hand went up, possibly because I had never been to Calcutta and our classmate Mohuya’s mother used to tell us such endearing stories about the city while feeding us luchies when we deliberately landed up at her home at Vivek Vihar just before dinner. That’s how I reached Calcutta, lost my way and ended up in Harish Mukherjee Street, instead of the nearby Hazra Road, and found Maharashtra Bhavan instead of Maharashtra Niwas. Which suited me best because I could not have afforded the better Niwas.

One or two days later, Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated. Needless to say, I was devastated and I was scared I would descend to depression with no one to talk to. I think only the collegiate atmosphere at the Calcutta Economic Times saved me. I was also asked if I was “LTTE” once or twice because the term had acquired currency after the assassination and I used to roam around central Calcutta in a lungi after work. The questions were good-natured, meant to impress me with the familiarity of geopolitical coinages. I took it in my stride as ribbing, which it was.

I sometimes wonder which was the toughest election I had been associated with in terms of newspapering. I think my friend and former colleague Harshita will choose the 2004 election when The Telegraph headlined it Power of Finger and illustrated the page with an oversized but real-life inked finger.

My choice will be the Bengal Assembly election of 2001. Both pages had a common link: the genius of Deepayan Chatterjee, our deputy editor. What new thing can you say when the Left Front keeps winning election after election? When I was at my wits’ end, I used to literally “look up” to the six-plus-foot Deepayan. He is almost always kind but when his brain was whirring and you intruded with your rabbit-caught-in-the-headline-look, he would glare at me. Then, always, always, without fail, he would lean forward, take a headline sheet, scrawl something carelessly as if it is the grocery list and pass it on to me. I was speechless, as I often was when Deepayan’s creative gears started shifting, especially when World Cup Soccer finals were over at some unholy hour on some far corner of the earth and we had only a few minutes to release the page.

In 2001, I was speechless because leaping at me from the headline sheet was what I consider the best election headline I had seen in my career. The headline: 1977, 1982, 1987, 1991, 1996, 2001…

The ellipsis was the coup de grace. A hint that the chain will continue, which was not very difficult to predict. Little did we know then that within a decade the Red Fort would crumble?

Personally, the hardest election for me was the 2021 Assembly election. Almost everyone, except our bureau chief Devadeep Purohit, predicted that Modi will make mincemeat of Mamata. I was especially proud of my colleagues because of the exceptional work they produced. We cut down on traditional reportage and focused on what Bengal stands to lose if the zealots came to power.

Our senior journalist Chandrima Bhattacharya wrote on short notice, again the story spotted and amplified by Devadeep, what turned out to be the best report of the election. Chandrima wrote on how Modi called Mamata “Didi O Didi” — an extremely difficult copy to write unless you are personally wounded and affected. The Telegraph gave maximum coverage to the blockbuster song, Nijeder Mawte Nijeder Gaan. I remember that the result day in 2021 was May 2. May 1 was a no-print day and we were working from home.

On April 30, while leaving the newsroom well past 2am, a colleague asked me: “Will we see you again here?” The unstated suggestion was that the BJP would not spare me if the party came to power in Bengal. The BJP did not come to power in 2021. As it turned out, September 29, 2023, was my last day in the newsroom or virtual newsroom as we were working from home. Not many in the desk got to ask me if that was my last day.

Since October 2023, I have travelled widely in Kerala and some parts of India and realised that I have friends I had never met before or even heard of before. I also realised that I am a bad speaker but some people, for some reason, like to inflict on themselves bad speakers like me. Especially students. I even campaigned for a candidate (who lost). But I had no idea what I would do on June 4, the result day. Around mid-May, my friend and Media One channel editor Pramod Raman asked me if I would like to be at their studio for three days till the result day. I reluctantly agreed.

When the exit polls were flashed, I wondered whether I should still go. I was in two minds. Until I received a message from a Muslim friend I had met during one of my travels in Malabar: “Are the exit polls true? I am very afraid.” The message gutted me. I did not know what to say. Eventually, I told him to keep the faith. Then I thought I should go to the studio. On June 3, I was welcomed to the studio with the warmth and the hospitality Malabar is known for. But I could sense the tension in the production rooms. So thick that you could cut it with a knife. The cliché is true. I felt it first-hand. No one told me they were tense and if so, why they were tense. They needn’t have told me. I was standing on Ground Zero of media oppression in India. Media One, run by a Muslim management but which has several journalists and other employees from other faiths too, had been abruptly banned by the Centre, triggering a long and expensive legal battle that the channel won emphatically.

The Supreme Court judgment in the Media One case should be part of the curriculum in all journalism schools. Also, the way Pramod and his team navigated the crisis. Unlike some of the “powerful” media houses, they did not cave in.)

On June 4, I reached the studio around 1.30pm. By then, there was a sea change. It was becoming increasingly clear that the BJP would not get a majority on its own. Ajims, Nishad and Pramod (the untiring journalists who were broadcasting from 5am) were on air. Someone asked me to wait in the editor’s office. Then someone from the production room saw me and waved me over. I think the desk knows where someone from the desk would like to be. I stood in one corner of the newsroom, reluctant to intrude.

I am glad I did not go to the editor’s room straightaway. The mood at the production room, packed mostly with young journalists, was infectious. Someone shouted: “Smriti trailing badly.” A cheer went up. So did a round of applause. Then they began feeding memes based on popular movie scenes. The great actress KPAC Lalitha’s meltdown in a scene was flashed when Smriti Irani’s plight was shown. “I need a headline,” another voice. PT Nasar, a veteran journalist I respect a lot, piped in: “Smritinaasam (The destruction of Smriti, and here a reference to the recollection of Smriti Irani’s tenure as minister and the Amethi conquest of 2019).” The response: “Yay.” I was in shock. It happens when you have an adrenaline rush after a long time. “Am I back in my newsroom?” I asked myself. “Tharoor has closed the gap. He is leading now.” Another cheer, another round of claps. Until a few minutes earlier, Shashi Tharoor was trailing. “Tharoor widening the gap. I need a headline.” “Turbo Tharoor.” Turbo is a full-on Mammootty action flick now running in Kerala movie halls. Unable to sleep, I had seen the movie less than 24 hours earlier on June 3 night. Another meme is on screen.

It is a scene from Bhramayugam, a Mammootty blockbuster in which the character played by the great actor keeps captive a man who seeks shelter in his manor. “You can’t go. I won’t allow you to go,” the most famous voice in Kerala is telling the captive. On the split screen, the image of a loser (I think it was Rajeev Chandrasekhar but I am not sure) appears. The suggestion: Mammootty’s character is telling the losing candidate that he cannot go to Parliament. Then Sabir asked me: “Would you like to come upstairs from where the figures are being updated?” I went up.

What a scene it was! It was one of the most breath-taking sights I have ever seen. The top deck — from where the figures are being fed to the on-screen charts — overlooks the studio floor from where the live telecast is going on. On the floor, the dashing Nishad is on fire. It is the principal duty of Nishad and Ajims to ensure that the coverage does not flag. Both were soft-spoken when I met them the day before.

But in front of the camera, they were tigers on the hunt. Behind me was the electric hubbub of the desk, unable to suppress the excitement as it became clear that Modi will fall short of majority. Ahead and down below on the brightly lit floor, Nishad, Ajims and Pramod were kicking their coverage into high gear and memes were flying thick and fast. That is the magnificent image that will stay with me forever. Later, Pramod and Nasar Sir took me to a nearby shop to have tea. On the way, an almost apologetic Pramod asked me: “Don’t take it otherwise. May I ask you what your headline would have been tomorrow had you run the newsroom? I wanted to ask you live on TV but I did not.”

I am glad Pramod, always reasonable and who insists on hearing the other side before passing judgement, did not ask me that question on air. Because I would not have had an answer. I told Pramod that I need a newsroom to think up a headline. I usually go blank and the reaction around me — even while working from home for months, I used to communicate constantly with as many colleagues as possible, especially Harshita — helped me to pick a headline.

When I told Harshita about this, she also asked me to think about what I would have done. I politely declined to answer. I don’t want to return to that space and place. But I am sure my headline would not have been on Modi (a headline on Modi would definitely have titillated social media but I would have kept it for an inside page). My headline most probably would have been on the people, especially the people of Uttar Pradesh. Just a simple “Thank U”, perhaps? Who knows? “U” opens up a lot of possibilities to work on as subsidiary visual ideas, besides Uttar Pradesh: Uttam Pradesh, U-tubers, Uniters, Unbreakables, U-turners….

Or, a tweak of Lincoln to say THE BETTER ANGELS OF OUR NATION? Or, if I focused on Modi, would I have shrunk the entire Page 1 by 56 per cent in recognition of the deflation of the Big Chest? I don’t know. Now you know why I am too reckless for newsrooms.

That night, I messaged my friend in Malabar who was alarmed by the exit polls: “Sleep well tonight. We are safe.”

The dark clouds have only parted. They still hang heavy over us. Even now, anything can happen. Still, the night of June 4 was one of relief. We needed to breathe. We did. Late that night, I received a message from a friend in Uttar Pradesh. It read: “My kids asked me the reason for my happiness today. I told them that you will realise the value of this day many years later, then you will thank me and countless others who fought against tyranny.” I replied: “Well said, Saheb. And I will tell my grandchildren that I knew you.”

I don’t know if my account makes a story, especially against the backdrop of the sacrifices made by many, including Umar Khalid who is still in jail; the whiplash journalism pursued by Ravish Kumar and Ajit Anjum and several others; the selfless crusade of Teesta Setalvad, Harsh Mander, Roop Rekha Verma and many, many volunteers; the sharp political instincts of Yogendra Yadav and Parakala Prabhakar; and the hope kept alive by Dhruv Rathee. But I do hope my account answers my friends’ questions.

This is my June 4 story.

N.E. Sudheer, the foremost bibliophile I know and a no-nonsense commentator, writes in TrueCopyThink. (Of course, you may say little has changed with Modi and he retains his destructive powers but there is one priceless change. We are no longer afraid, especially no longer afraid to hope and to dream)

HOPE

A pluralistic Opposition, steered by a redoubtable civil society, will certainly preserve “India”. The democracy of Nehru will have sparkling evolutionary progressions

DREAM

All that I am visualising now is Modi falling prey to opportunistic politics and leaving Parliament one day after losing a confidence motion. The sengol must also accompany him. This is the dream of an ordinary citizen who takes pride in the idea of India. Had the popular verdict been otherwise, we would have been afraid even to dream.

(The author is a senior journalist; this is from his social media post)

Related:

The handover at Rae Bareli

The post My June 4 Story: The Day Results to the 2024 Elections came in appeared first on SabrangIndia.

One needs to thank the people of Tamil Nadu for decisively throwing BJP out. It is also the result of political arithmetic, and MK Stalin needs kudos for his rainbow coalition. He is an example for all other political forces as how to run a coalition. The Congress needs to learn, particularly where it is the main power by giving space to smaller parties.

Maharashtra was supposed to give a big jolt to the BJP and the NDA, and people have done that. Unfortunately, Karnataka and Telangana could not sustain much for the Congress. The party needs to evaluate as why it is unable to hold on to its domain area even for a year. The Congress must understand how Bhupesh Baghel was over-hyped in Chhattishgarh. The party could win merely a seat of Korba.

Madhya Pradesh has remained in the grip of Hindutva for long and the Congress will have to work from ground level and look for committed cadres and leaders for that. Someone like Kamal Nath will not benefit the party and must be allowed only to the confines of Chhindwara.

The Congress party in Karnataka and Telangana must ponder over as what went wrong. Is the powerful Voklinga-Lingayat lobby still unable to digest Siddharamaiyya?

Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh remain in the tight grip of Brahmin-Bania-Rajput Hindutva politics. The absence of a powerful Ambedkarite or backward class movement or caste consciousness has resulted in Hindutva lobby gaining.

UP and Bihar have common factors largely unacknowledged by powerful parties. Lalu Prasad Yadav and RJD need to come out of family politics. Nitish Kumar, despite his diminishing aura, remained acceptable to Mahadalits.

While Akhilesh Yadav in Uttar Pradesh accommodated of non-Yadav OBCs and other Dalit communities, Lalu’s resistance in accepting these cost RJD a lot.  Kanhaiya Kumar would have made a big difference in Bihar than in East Delhi.

Be that as it may, the fact is, in Uttar Pradesh the Ambedkarite movement and awakening is much more powerful than in Bihar, and that makes a huge difference.

One cannot also forget the brave battle of the Punjab farmers, youth resistance and the anger among Muslims, who were blamed for every evil that India has today. There were efforts to divide the unity of Dalits and OBCs by invoking the Muslim reservation issue, but they remained calm and politically mature.

Long ago Kanshiram said that we don’t need a mazboot (strong) government but a majbur (vulnerable) government in Delhi, as it works better for thepeople. With a majbur sarkar in the horizon, one hopes it gets into work and breathes in fresh air.

India remains indebted our Constitution, Baba Saheb Ambedkar, and of course Jawaharlal Nehru. Nehru remains an icon of India, our best address to the world when we speak about our prime ministers. Being Nehru means much more than merely winning elections.

People have said categorically that they need humble mortal leaders to lead, and not those who call themselves emissaries of God. They ask for an account of five years and don’t want for a 1000 year ‘vision’. One hopes the majbur sarkar will work better for the people of India, also respect and protect our Constitution and institutions.

Author is Human rights defender

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Ayodhya sends out message to those ‘playing politics’ in Lord Ram’s name appeared first on SabrangIndia.