Best of Both Sides: Bihar shows how elections now favour the ruling party
If elections are to be won merely by directly depositing money into voters’ accounts during the polling period, then what is the need for the ritual of conducting elections at all?
After Bihar election verdict, what are the lessons for the Opposition? (Illustration: C R Sasikumar) Given that public memory in India fades quickly, let’s begin by revisiting a significant political development from 2017. The demise of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa left the R K Nagar Assembly seat in Chennai vacant, prompting the Election Commission to schedule a bypoll for April 12, 2017.
Everything was proceeding normally until April 9, just three days before polling, when the Election Commission (EC) issued a statement saying: “Voters are being influenced on a large scale through money, gifts, and other inducements. Under such circumstances, free and fair elections are not possible. Voting is therefore postponed.”
Earlier, during the 2016 Tamil Nadu Assembly elections, voting in the Aravakurichi and Thanjavur constituencies had also been postponed because of repeated complaints of cash-for-vote practices. What is noteworthy here is that there was never any clear information on exactly who had received this money. Yet, the EC acted decisively to protect electoral integrity.
In Bihar, the Model Code of Conduct came into force on October 6, as the Assembly’s five-year term was due to end. Just 10 days earlier, on September 26, a scheme was suddenly launched without prior announcement or planning under which Rs 10,000 was transferred via DBT into women’s bank accounts. Under this “Mahila Rojgar Yojana,” a massive amount of Rs 12,500 crore was to be transferred.
After this, the transfers continued: October 3 (three days before the MCC), October 7 (a day after the MCC), then on October 17, October 24, October 31, and even on November 7, between the first and second phases of voting, Rs 10,000 each was deposited into women’s accounts. This was a blatant violation of the Model Code of Conduct. The pension given to women was also increased from Rs 400 to Rs 1,100 and transferred during the election period. Such timing makes the intention unmistakable. This was state-sponsored inducement, not welfare.
Despite multiple complaints from opposition parties, these transfers continued. Just before Bihar, a similar move had been made in Maharashtra, where Rs 7,500 each was deposited into the accounts of 2.34 crore women, resulting in a one-sided outcome in favour of the BJP and the NDA. The EC took no action on schemes launched during the lame-duck period. This pattern shows that last-minute cash transfers have become a deliberate electoral tool.
In just seven years, the EC’s approach seems to have changed completely. The same Commission that had postponed elections in R K Nagar, Aravakurichi, and Thanjavur when political parties were allegedly distributing cash, now remains silent when the government openly transfers thousands of crores into women’s bank accounts during elections, effectively becoming an NDA partner in this crime.
In Rajasthan, during the 2023 Assembly elections, the EC put a halt to the smartphone distribution scheme for women even though it had been announced in the February 2022 state budget and about 30 per cent of eligible women had already received smartphones. Moreover, ongoing schemes like social security pensions (old-age, widow, and disability pensions) and the Annapurna scheme, which delivered ration to households, were also stopped.
In contrast, in Bihar and Maharashtra, money was deposited into women’s accounts even during the election period. The application of the MCC has, therefore, become selective, raising concerns about uniformity and fairness. These schemes in NDA-ruled states were launched without prior planning, purely for political gain. This is why Union Minister Nitin Gadkari publicly stated, in reference to Maharashtra, that after distributing money to women, no funds are left for any other subsidy.
The EC has still not responded to Rahul Gandhi’s revelations on voter data in Haryana. Its response to the Mahadevapura revelations was also unsatisfactory. The EC remains silent on cash-for-vote schemes, allowing open vote-buying in favour of the NDA. This silence weakens the very institution tasked with safeguarding the democratic process. In such a situation, questions are raised not just about the NDA government but also about the EC.
If elections are to be won merely by directly depositing money into voters’ accounts during the polling period, then what is the need for the ritual of conducting polls at all? It is said that elections are held in China and Russia, too, where democracy exists only in a limited form. Is there now an attempt to shape India’s electoral system like China’s and Russia’s, where the election process is structured to benefit the ruling party? India must not allow its electoral system to drift toward a controlled democracy where outcomes are shaped by state machinery rather than voter choice.
Gehlot is former Chief Minister of Rajasthan and member of Congress Working Committee
Share
