ADR Moves Supreme Court Seeking Independent Collegium For Appointment Of Election Commission Members

The petition filed though Advocate Prashant Bhushan states that the present process of appointing members to the Election Commission, solely by the executive, is incompatible with Article 324(2) of the Constitution.

"There is no doubt that in order to ensure the purity of the election process it was thought by our Constitution-makers that the responsibility to hold free and fair elections in the country should be entrusted to an independent body which would be insulated from political and/or executive interference."

It is submitted that the appointment of members of Election Commission on the "pick and choose" of the executive violates the very foundation for which it was created, thus, making the Commission a branch of executive.

"Democracy is a facet of the basic structure of the constitution and in order to ensure free and fair elections and to maintain healthy democracy in our country, the Election Commission should be insulated from political and/or executive interference," the plea states.

Reliance is placed on Rojer Mathew v. South Indian Bank Ltd., (2020) 6 SCC 1 whereby the Supreme Court declared the composition of Search-cum-Selection Committee, which was dominated by the members from central government in Column 4 of the Schedule to the Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal and Other Authorities (Qualification, experience and other conditions of service of members) Rules, 2017, as unconstitutional.

The executive is a litigating party in most of the litigation and hence cannot be allowed to be a dominant participant in judicial appointments, the Top Court had said.

Drowning an analogy, the Petitioner has argued,

"in the present case the Election Commission is not only responsible for conducting free and fair elections but it also renders a 17 quasi judicial function between the various political parties including the ruling government and other parties. In such circumstances the executive cannot be a sole participant in the appointment of members of Election Commission as it gives unfettered discretion to the ruling party to choose someone whose loyalty to it is ensured and thereby renders the selection process vulnerable to manipulation."

The Petitioner seeks implementation of the 255^th Law Commission Report, where it was recommended that the appointment of all the Election Commissioner should be made by the President in consultation with a three-member collegium or selection committee, consisting of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition of the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India.

Reference is also made to the 4^th Report submitted by the Second Administrative Reform Commission in January 2007, which also recommended for the constitution of a neutral and independent collegium headed by the Prime Minister with the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, the Law Minister and the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha as is members for making recommendations for consideration of the President for appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and the Election Commissioners.

Similarly, Dr. Dinesh Goswami Committee in its Report of May 1990 recommended for the effective consultation with neutral authorities like Chief Justice of India and the Leader of the Opposition for the appointment in Election Commission.

Justice Tarkunde Committee in its Report of 1975 recommended that the members of Election Commission should be appointed by the President on the advice of a Committee consisting of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India.