The Supreme Court of India Today (Feb 3) set February 12 to hear petitions challenging the 2023 law that allows the government to control the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs). The law removes the Chief Justice of India (CJI) from the selection panel, replacing them with a government minister, raising concerns about political interference in elections. Advocates Prashant Bhushan and Varun Thakur argue that this move violates the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling, which mandated an independent committee for such appointments. The Centre opposes the plea, leading to a high-stakes legal battle over India’s electoral independence.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has set February 12 as the date to hear petitions challenging the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) under the new 2023 law.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh announced that the issue would be decided finally on its merit.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), informed the court that the matter was earlier listed for hearing on February 4, but it was unlikely to be taken up due to other pending cases.
Bhushan stressed the urgency of the case, referring to the retirement of current Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar on February 18. He stated that the case was significant as it related to the 2023 Supreme Court ruling, which had laid down guidelines for the appointment of election commissioners.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Sends Notice to ECI on Free Symbol Allotment Challenge
He emphasized that the 2023 verdict had ruled that ECs should not be solely appointed by the government but by an independent committee consisting of the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India (CJI).
If this process was not followed, it would threaten electoral democracy.
Bhushan argued-
“They have brought an Act by which they have removed the Chief Justice and brought in another minister, effectively making the commissioners’ appointment only at the pleasure of the government. That’s precisely what the Constitution bench said that it is opposed to the level-playing field and our electoral democracy. You need to have an independent committee to appoint the election commissioners.”
Advocate Varun Thakur, appearing for Congress leader Jaya Thakur, also filed a petition seeking a direction to the Central Government to make the CEC’s appointment as per the Supreme Court’s March 2, 2023, verdict.
On behalf of the Central Government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta strongly opposed Bhushan’s arguments and objected to his request for an interim order.
Mehta pointed out that another Supreme Court bench had already refused to pass an interim order on the matter. He also assured the court that the Central Government was ready for legal arguments, and the case could be taken up for a final hearing.
Earlier, on January 8, 2024, the Supreme Court had remarked that this case involved a crucial conflict between the judiciary’s ruling and the government’s power to make laws. The court had agreed to examine the constitutionality of the new appointment process.
On March 15, 2024, the Supreme Court declined to stay the appointment of new Election Commissioners under the 2023 law, which had excluded the CJI from the selection panel. Instead, the court postponed its decision on multiple petitions challenging the new appointment system.
The Supreme Court reminded the petitioners that its March 2, 2023, ruling had directed that the three-member selection panel (PM, Leader of Opposition, and CJI) would continue until Parliament passed a new law.
The NGO ADR had challenged the exclusion of the CJI and argued that the Election Commission must be free from “political” and “executive interference“ to protect India’s democratic integrity.
According to ADR’s petition, the new law undermined the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling by giving excessive power to the government in the selection process, which weakened the independence of the Election Commission.
ALSO READ: #BREAKING New Electoral Bond Data Uploaded on ECI Website, Furnished by SBI
Under the new law, a selection panel led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi recommended the appointment of former IAS officers Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Sandhu as Election Commissioners in 2024.
The NGO ADR challenged the constitutional validity of Section 7 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, which excluded the CJI from the selection process.
The Supreme Court’s March 2, 2023, judgment had clearly stated that leaving the appointment of ECs and the CEC entirely in the hands of the government could harm democracy and hinder free and fair elections.
In her petition, Jaya Thakur sought a court order to prevent the government from appointing new Election Commissioners under the 2023 law while simultaneously challenging its provisions.
CASE TITLE:
Dr Jaya Thakur & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr. | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 14 of 2024 (and connected cases).
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on CJI Sanjeev Khanna
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
