Opinion ‘Vote chori’ row: Opposition mulls impeachment of CEC Gyanesh Kumar

According to sources, the matter of the CEC’s impeachment was discussed at a meeting of Opposition floor leaders chaired by Rajya Sabha LoP and Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge earlier in the day. “We have had discussions and there is consensus. We will take an appropriate decision at the appropriate time,” said the Congress’s Deputy Leader in the Lok Sabha, Gaurav Gogoi, who was among those who addressed a press conference of Opposition parties.

“If we have all jointly come before you, all parliamentary and legal options are open,” said RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha.

Accusing the EC of “running away” from the Opposition’s allegations, Gogoi said, “The right to vote is the most important among those in the Constitution … Our democracy is alive solely because of this right, the Election Commission of India (ECI) is the protector of this right; but are seeing that it is not only unable to answer questions being raised by several political parties, it is running away from them.”

Gogoi said the poll panel appeared to be “under the command of certain officials who are clearly biased … this is why they are against any investigation of voter fraud”, adding that MPs from several parties would keep an eye on the EC.

Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Mahua Moitra said the EC’s job, as a Constitutional body, was “not to attack the Opposition”. She said Kumar’s press conference on Sunday was “a display of puppetry”.

“Mr (Election) Commissioner Sir, I would urge that you leave that to your political masters … this is ludicrous, it is not the job of the CEC to attack the Opposition, your job, sir, is to go into great detail as to what the valid queries raised by the Opposition were.”

“Is the list on which the Lok Sabha election was held fraudulent? If that is true, the current and previous Election Commissioners should be prosecuted, and this Lok Sabha should be dissolved immediately,” she said.

Claiming that “democracy is in peril”, DMK MP Tiruchi Siva said the Opposition would “resort to both legal and parliamentary procedures” going forward, while Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Arvind Sawant said Opposition parties “were expecting clarity” from the CEC on the issues they had raised, “but instead we got a CEC speaking like a spokesperson of the BJP”.

CPI(M) MP John Brittas alleged that the BJP-led NDA alliance had the “ulterior motive” of making the “EC its B-team”, accusing the poll panel of bias. “We believe there is a diabolical design to adulterate the voter list from Kerala to Jammu and Kashmir,” he said.

AAP MP Sanjay Singh accused Kumar of making “illogical statements” and providing no answers, demanding how “not even a single vote was added” to the rolls in Bihar even as 65 lakh names were removed in the draft rolls published on August 1. “You cut 65 lakh votes in Bihar but did not add even a single one? You could not find one vote to add? What kind of SIR is this?” he asked.

In a joint statement, 20 Opposition parties alleged that the “new ECI” was under the BJP’s control and the CEC “gave no clarification or comment” on the Supreme Court’s August 14 order dismissing arguments against releasing basic data of the 65 lakh voters. Kumar, they said, was also silent on Gandhi’s allegation of voter fraud in the Mahadevapura Assembly segment that allegedly helped the BJP win the Bangalore Central Lok Sabha seat.

“ECI has completely failed in discharging its constitutional duty of ensuring a free and fair electoral system in the country. It has now become clear that the ECI is not being led by officers who can ensure a level playing field … those who lead the ECI divert and thwart any attempt at a meaningful inquiry into voter fraud and instead opt to intimidate those who challenge the ruling party. This is a serious indictment,” read the statement..

Targeting the Opposition, BJP MP Sambit Patra said, “They are the same people who raised a finger at the Supreme Court when a verdict was given in favour of the Ayodhya Ram Mandir … They have even called the Indian Army Chief a goon, attacked the Army and demanded evidence after Operation Sindoor and air strikes … The EC writes to the Opposition again and again, but they don’t visit the EC once. They only have one intention: to save the infiltrators who have come from foreign countries through their own people.”

How is a CEC removed?

The CEC can be removed from office in the same manner and on the same grounds as a Supreme Court judge, as stated in Article 324(5) of the Constitution. The process is also set down in Section 11 of the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.

Article 324(5) states that “the Chief Election Commissioner shall not be removed from his office except in like manner and on the like grounds as a Judge of the Supreme Court and the conditions of service of the Chief Election Commissioner shall not be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment”.

It further provides that “any other Election Commissioner or a Regional Commissioner shall not be removed from office except on the recommendation of the Chief Election Commissioner”.

The grounds for the removal of the CEC and other Election Commissioners (ECs) are also set down in Section 11 of the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which regulates the appointment, conditions of service and term of office of the CEC and the ECs.

The Judges Inquiry Act, 1968, Section 3, which pertains to “Investigation into misbehaviour or incapacity of Judge by Committee” provides that “If notice is given of a motion for presenting an address to President praying for the removal of a Judge…(a) in the case of a notice given in the House of the People, by not less than one hundred members of that House; (b) in the case of a notice given in the Council of States, by not less than fifty members of that Council…”

Following this, the Act states further, the Speaker or, as the case may be, the Chairman may, after consulting such persons, if any, as he thinks fit and after considering such materials, if any, as may be available to him, either admit the motion or refuse to admit the same.”

If the motion is admitted, the Speaker or, as the case may be, the Chairman “shall keep the motion pending and constitute, as soon as may be, for the purpose of making an investigation into the grounds on which the removal of a Judge is prayed for, a Committee consisting of three members”.

One of the members “shall be chosen from among the Chief Justice and other Judges of the Supreme Court”, one from among the Chief Justices of the High Courts, and one “a person who is, in the opinion of, the Speaker or, as the case may be, the Chairman, a distinguished jurist”.

This Committee “shall frame definite charges against the Judge on the basis of which the investigation is proposed to be held” and such charges “together with a statement of the grounds on which each such charge is based shall be communicated to the Judge and he shall be given a reasonable opportunity of presenting a written statement of defence within such time as may be specified in this behalf by the Committee.”

For an impeachment motion to be accepted, at least two-thirds of those “present and voting” in both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha must vote in favour of removing the judge, and the number of votes in favour must be more than 50% of the “total membership” of each House. If Parliament passes such a vote, the President will pass an order for the removal of the judge, or in this case, the CEC.