In a significant ruling on Friday, the Supreme Court of India declined to stay the appointments of two new election commissioners under the recently enacted Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. This law notably excludes the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel, a point that has sparked considerable debate and legal challenges.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Dipankar Datta, and Augustine George Masih heard a batch of petitions questioning the legality of the new appointments. During the proceedings, the court addressed the petitioners’ concerns, particularly regarding a pre-poned meeting for the selection of election commissioners. The bench encouraged the petitioners to file a separate application to highlight their grievances regarding the timing of this meeting.
While the bench acknowledged the concerns raised by the petitioners, it made it clear that it generally refrains from staying laws through interim orders. “Normally and generally, we do not stay a law by way of an interim order,” the bench stated. Consequently, the court deferred the hearing on the batch of pleas challenging the appointments of the two new election commissioners.
The petitioners, including senior advocate Vikas Singh representing Jaya Thakur, argued that the appointments represent a “clear-cut transgression” of legal norms. Singh emphasized that once a judgment is passed, it is imperative to adhere strictly to the law without any deviations. This assertion underscores the concerns raised about the integrity of the electoral process and the independence of the Election Commission, which is crucial for upholding democracy in India.
The appointments in question were made on Thursday, with Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Sandhu being selected as the new election commissioners. Their selection was conducted by a panel chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, alongside Home Minister Amit Shah and Law Minister Kiren Rijiju. This method of appointment has raised eyebrows, particularly in light of the law’s exclusion of the Chief Justice from the selection process, which many legal experts and critics argue undermines the neutrality and independence of the Election Commission.
The need for reform in the appointment of election commissioners has been a long-standing debate in India. Advocates for reform assert that the process should be more transparent and inclusive, ensuring that the Election Commission operates free from governmental influence. The current appointments have reignited discussions about the need for a more balanced approach to selecting election officials, as the integrity of the electoral process is fundamental to the health of Indian democracy.
The two vacancies in the Election Commission arose after the retirement of Anup Chandra Pandey on February 14 and the sudden resignation of Arun Goel. The appointments of Kumar and Sandhu mark a new chapter in the functioning of the Election Commission, which is responsible for overseeing elections in the world’s largest democracy.
As the legal challenges continue to unfold, the Supreme Court’s decision not to stay the appointments under the 2023 law has significant implications for the future of electoral governance in India. The court’s next steps in addressing the concerns raised will be closely monitored by political analysts, legal experts, and the public alike, as the independence of the Election Commission remains a pivotal issue in ensuring fair and free elections in the country.