The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, signed into law by President Droupadi Murmu.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
A recent Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in the Supreme Court has sparked a significant legal debate over the new law governing the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs). This development comes in the wake of concerns about executive overreach and the autonomy of the Election Commission.
Also Read:- Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul on Article 370
Overview of the New Law
The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, signed into law by President Droupadi Murmu, has replaced the Election Commission (Conditions of Service of Election Commissioners and Transaction of Business) Act, 1991. The new law stipulates that the CEC and ECs will be appointed by the President based on the recommendation of a selection committee, comprising the Prime Minister, a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha.
Concerns Raised in the PIL
The petition, filed by regular practicing advocates and drawn by Advocate Anjale Patel, seeks to set aside the December 28 gazette notification for the appointment of election commissioners. The petitioners argue for an independent and transparent selection system, constituting a neutral committee for appointing the CEC and ECs, and the inclusion of the Chief Justice of India in the selection panel.
Also Read:- Public Interest Litigation Challenges New Criminal Code Laws in Supreme Court.
The PIL highlights a critical legal question: whether Parliament or any legislative assembly has the authority to promulgate a gazette notification or ordinance to nullify or amend a judgment previously rendered by the Supreme Court, especially when the judgment emanates from a Constitution Bench. The petitioners have requested the court to direct the Union of India to implement an independent and transparent system of selection, constituting a neutral and independent selection committee.
Criticism of the Act
The Act has faced criticism for allegedly diminishing the Election Commission’s institutional legitimacy and encroaching on its autonomy by removing the Chief Justice of India from the selection committee. Critics argue that this move is contrary to a March ruling by a Supreme Court Constitution Bench, which mandated the inclusion of the Chief Justice in the selection process, emphasizing the need for an independent and unbiased committee.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s response to this PIL will be closely watched, as it will have significant implications for the future of India’s electoral process and the independence of its Election Commission. The petition underscores the ongoing debate about the balance of power between the executive and judiciary and the importance of maintaining the autonomy of key democratic institutions.