Former chief election commissioners SY Quraishi, VS Sampath and Naveen Chawla welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision to appoint a committee to select election commissioners.
“It’s a very welcome judgment and has been a long awaited demand,” Quraishi said. “This reform has been pending for over two decades, with even the Law Commission of India recommending it. It is very important for the perception of neutrality and non-partisanship of the autonomous body that the Commission is.”
Sampath concurred with Quraishi. “The selection by a committee will always be that the selection by a government order. It is, indeed, a welcome decision.”
Sampath added that it will bring greater transparency to the selection process. “The very fact that the names under consideration will have to stand the scrutiny of the court and the opposition will also ensure better quality in the selection.”
Chawla said, “This reform is long overdue and will make the working of the Commissioners an easier and stronger process. They will no longer be dependent only on the executive but the judiciary and the opposition will have a stake in their appointment. This will provide satisfaction to the political parties and assure them that the working of the Commission is independent of government pressure.”
Election Commissioners at present are appointed at the behest of the government by the order of the President. Chief Election commissioner (CEC), by convention, are the senior most election commissioners.
The Supreme Court on Thursday revamped the selection mechanism to appoint the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs), ruling that a panel comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition (LoP), and the Chief Justice of India (CJI) shall appoint them.
A five-judge Constitution bench presided by Justice K M Joseph made the ruling which is set to limit the government’s authority to make such high-level appointments like that of the CEC and ECs, and this will continue to hold good till a law is made by Parliament, as per the SC bench.
“Purity of the election process must be maintained to preserve democracy. Otherwise, it would lead to disastrous consequences,” said justice Joseph while reading out the operative part of his judgment.