Ink that rubs off, last-minute door-to-door campaigning: Why civic polls have put the State Election Commission in the dock

While Naik, who is also a minister, eventually managed to vote after officials intervened, several voters were not as fortunate.

The situation was compounded by complaints that the indelible ink applied after voting was easily coming off. MNS chief Raj Thackeray alleged, “The current system is working only to eliminate opponents and to ensure victory for the ruling party. When we raised the issue of double voting earlier, the administration initially rejected it, but it has now published the list of double voters. This entire process is a fraud.”

He also claimed that the election system had been rigged in the government’s favour. “Today it looks entirely different. Instead of ink, they have brought pens, and the ink from those is being wiped off. These are not signs of a healthy democracy. Holding such fraudulent elections and gaining power in this way cannot be called a victory. There should be limits to how much misuse of power is allowed,” he added.

Responding to the controversy, Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde said he spoke with Suresh Kakani, Commissioner, State Election Commission.

“He told me that this ink has been used for many years. Earlier, the ink was applied from a bottle. Now it is applied directly to the fingers using a marker. Some TV channels conducted experiments and found that the ink does not come off immediately. The Election Commission has taken care to ensure that no bogus voting takes place. The election process should be conducted in a very transparent manner,” said Shinde.

Delay in uploading candidates’ affidavits

One of the earliest and most persistent criticisms against the Commission was the delay in making candidates’ affidavits publicly available. Unlike elections conducted by the Election Commission of India, there was a visible lag in uploading affidavits on SEC and municipal corporation websites.

Affidavits detailing criminal cases, assets, liabilities, and educational qualifications were uploaded days after nominations closed, and in some cases close to polling day, limiting voters’ ability to make informed choices.

Political parties questioned that while candidates were required to submit affidavits within strict deadlines, the Commission did not follow similarly strict timelines for public disclosure.

Door-to-door campaigning in the final 48 hours

SEC’s decision to allow door-to-door campaigning during the last 48 hours before polling triggered political backlash, particularly amid reports of money distribution across the state. While the Commission announced that public campaigning would end at 5.30 pm on January 13, it permitted candidates to continue door-to-door visits beyond that deadline.

Maharashtra Navnirman Sena chief Raj Thackeray questioned the decision, saying, “In all elections until now, there has been a gap after the official campaigning ends. Traditionally, there was no campaigning on the day before voting. This tradition has been broken. The Election Commission is working according to the government’s wishes. If leaflets cannot be distributed, can money be distributed instead? Why is this permission being granted now?”

State Election Commissioner Dinesh Waghmare defended the decision, citing a February 2012 SEC order that permits door-to-door campaigning after the end of public campaigns.

Reports and videos alleging money distribution and clashes between political workers also surfaced from Vasai, Dombivli, Thane, Chembur, Panvel, Akola, Nagpur, Pune, and Pimpri Chinchwad.

Introduction of PADU machines

The Commission also faced criticism over the introduction of the Printing Auxiliary Display Unit (PADU) machines scheduled to be deployed during counting in Mumbai by the BMC.

Opposition parties alleged that the decision was communicated only days before polling and without adequate consultation.

While BMC is responsible for conducting the count, SEC was criticised for failing to effectively disseminate information about the machines, despite being the state’s supervisory authority for elections.

Staggered counting of votes

Another contentious move was the decision to allow staggered counting of votes in Mumbai, departing from the earlier practice of counting all wards simultaneously. Civic officials said votes would be counted two wards at a time under each returning officer who oversees around 20 constituencies. Once counting for two wards is completed, officials would move on to the next set.

While BMC argued that this would ensure smoother counting by concentrating manpower, Opposition parties questioned the need for the change. Congress MLA Aslam Shaikh asked, “What is the point of changing the system suddenly, which has been used for years?”

Spike in unopposed victories

SEC also drew criticism over an unusually high number of unopposed wins. As many as 69 candidates, largely from the ruling combine, were declared elected unopposed, a sevenfold increase over previous elections.

Although the Commission later said it would seek reports from municipal corporations before announcing winners in these wards, opposition parties argue that no visible follow-up action has been taken so far.

Handling of Model Code of Conduct violations

Opposition parties accused SEC of adopting a soft approach towards violations of the Model Code of Conduct. Despite communal rhetoric during campaigning, including statements that the Mumbai mayor would be Hindu and Marathi, the Commission refrained from taking action, stating that no specific complaint had been received.

Earlier, Waghmare told The Indian Express, “If it has been published in the media and brought to our notice, action can be taken as per the rules of the model code of conduct.”