Why they don8217;t like it

If the Congress is conveying that it will be happy to have the BJP8217;s Bhairon Singh Shekhawat as Rajasthan chief minister during the state elections, and the BJP doing the same about Congressman Digvijay Singh in Madhya Pradesh, Gill should havelittle grievance. The Election Commission knows that the two parties have been most vociferous in their complaints about official interference. Since Rajasthan looms large before the Congress and Madhya Pradesh before the BJP, it will not be surprising to find both talking about gerrymandering after these states8217; elections.

The Congress and the BJP accuse each other of managing certain constituencies during polls through bureaucrats or bad elements. One refrain is that the chief ministers go out of their way to interfere. How come both parties join hands to oppose Gill when he makes a specific proposal to end chief ministers8217; role during polls?

Bihar is notorious for rigging and booth capturing. Officials side openly with the party in power during elections. Fair polls would be impossible if the Rashtriya Janata Dal government stayed at the helm. Would it not be better if Rabri Dei were to give the reins of administration to the governor during the election? The state is so sharply divided between LalooYadav on one side and George Fernandes and Nitish Kumar on the other that even slight government interference can tilt the balance in Laloo Yadav8217;s favour.

Bihar is probably the worst example. But practically every government uses the state machinery for its own purpose during polls. Public servants, including the returning officers, are from the state and have to contend with the chief minister. Commission observers can detect blatant lapses but what happens in remote area does not generally come to their notice. Chief ministers plan things long before polling. If they are not there during polling, the jigsaw pieced together by them will collapse.

The EC has not even got permission to act against officers found wanting during elections. Technically they are under the Commission but it has no power to punish them. It can only recommend action against them to the government. Why would they care about its orders when it cannot touch them?

There has been long correspondence between the EC and thegovernment on this but the Commission8217;s orders continue to be flouted. It has gone to the Supreme Court against the government on the right to punish officials it finds guilty. The case has been pending for three years.

Gill has drawn the attention of Atal Behari Vajpayee to the case, as he did when I. K. Gujral and H. D. Deve Gowda were prime ministers. All have stayed silent. The government cannot afford to part with the power to punish officers because it selects them for manipulation. The officials against whom the Commission has complained are the ones who are postmasters in pressuring the voters, changing ballot boxes and rigging elections.

Dhaka is many steps ahead of us in holding fair polls. Its constitution enjoins upon the government to hand power to the chief justice once elections are announced. He stays in power for 90 days, during which he has to complete elections and install a government. The system has worked to the satisfaction of all political parties. But Bangladesh has a unitarysystem, where states do not exist as such. Pakistan has no such provision in its constitution. But elections have to be held within 90 days. The president can appoint anybody from the outside as caretaker Prime Minister. During the last two elections he did so.

If India were to follow such examples, notwithstanding Gill8217;s proposal, there would be no constitutional hitch. Once the government at the Centre ends its tenure or falls, the President should appoint a caretaker government consisting of eminent persons. He cannot head it because there is no provision of presidential rule at the Centre. But such a government would inspire more confidence than the outgoing government of political parties.

The late Sanjiva Reddy tried to experiment when the Janata government fell in 1979. He invited Sheikh Abdullah to form a caretaker government but he said no. Later, he requested Swaran Singh but he too declined.

The problem will arise where different political parties will be in power. Their tenure cannot beshortened legally or otherwise because of Lok Sabha polls. The best way may be to keep the assembly in animated suspension8217; during polls. The governor can run administration for that period.

The Congress has demanded electoral reforms at the Pachmarhi conclave. The BJP supports the idea off and on. But its opposition to the Model Code of Conduct becoming applicable only after elections are notified shows a mind which wants to avoid electoral discipline.

Even otherwise, standards have deteriorated since Jawaharlal Nehru8217;s time. During the first general election in 1952, he wrote to cabinet colleagues and chief ministers to cut the number of tours in the interest of fair elections. The Election Commission had pointed out how official tours gave an unfair advantage to the party in power. From then on, Nehru made it a practice to write to chief ministers before every election to cut down their tours and to avoid visits to their constituencies 8220;on business.8221; He suggested that if a minister had official worknear his constituency he should travel at his own expense. Those instructions were not scrupulously implemented but there was at least an attempt to separate official business from election work. In Indira Gandhi8217;s regime there was not even a pretence to be above board. The BJP should have followed Nehru, not Mrs Gandhi.