No communal speeches, no alarm on Constitution: Poll panel to BJP, Congress

While the EC did not name Modi, Rahul or Kharge, it asked the party presidents for their “comments” on the alleged MCC violations by their “star campaigners”.

In its notice to Nadda, the EC had attached complaints from the Congress, CPI and CPI (M-L), which pertained to the Prime Minister’s speech in Banswara in Rajasthan where he accused the Congress of appeasing Muslims, saying it would hand over wealth to those who have more children and “infiltrators” if it comes to power.

Along with its notice to Kharge, the EC had attached the BJP’s complaint against Rahul for alleging that Modi wanted “one language” in the country and against Kharge himself, for saying President Droupadi Murmu was not invited for the Ram Temple consecration because she belonged to the Scheduled Tribe community.

In its orders to both party presidents on Wednesday, the EC said their responses to the notices were not tenable. Both Nadda and Kharge had defended their star campaigners.

Citing complaints against both parties it received after the April 25 notices, the poll panel said the star campaigners had not stopped making statements that were allegedly violative of the MCC. It asked Nadda and Kharge to “remain dutiful towards special responsibility of star campaigners and issue formal notes to them to maintain decorum in their utterances”. Both were reminded of the MCC provision against aggravating existing differences or creating “mutual hatred” between castes and communities.

According to a source in the EC, the poll panel’s order to the party presidents to issue written notes to their star campaigners to maintain decorum was a first, and the next step in the “calibrated” approach adopted by the Commission this election.

In its communication to both party presidents, the EC also said: “The utterances of the concerned star campaigners follow patterns and create narratives which can be damaging beyond the MCC period. Technical loopholes or extreme interpretations of other political party’s utterances cannot discharge them from this core responsibility of their own content which ought to be corrective to the ongoing discourse and not further plummeting the quality of campaign discourse.”

While issuing notices to Kharge and Nadda, the EC had earlier said the star campaigners would remain responsible for their statements, but the poll panel would address parties on a case-to-case basis. As of Wednesday, the EC was yet to issue any direct notice to Modi, Rahul or Kharge for the statements cited.

In its communication to Nadda, the EC directed him “as party president to also convey to all star campaigners to not make speeches and statements, which may divide society.” It also directed the BJP and its star campaigners “to refrain from any campaigning methods/utterances along religious/communal lines”.

After two extensions, Nadda had replied to the EC’s April 25 notice on May 13, saying the Prime Minister’s statements had been to “expose mal-intent” of the Congress. He had cited statements of the Congress star campaigners in support of an “institutional survey”, and former Indian Overseas Congress head Sam Pitroda’s statement regarding inheritance tax to defend Modi’s allegation. Nadda also told the EC that the Congress committed a “sin” by staying away from the Ram Temple consecration.

The EC’s order to Nadda Wednesday said: “Regarding the allegations against the star campaigners and the alleged statements made in their public campaign speeches, it is noted that there is no explicit denial of this fact in your response…The MCC, an agreed document by all political parties, further casts an extra responsibility on the party in power.”

Nadda was asked to convey to all the BJP star campaigners not to make speeches “which may divide the society”.

On the Congress, the EC asked Kharge to convey to his party’s star campaigners not to make statements that give a “false impression such as that the Constitution of India may be abolished or sold” and to comply with its 2019 advisory regarding references to defence forces while campaigning.

The EC asked the Congress “not to make potentially divisive statements regarding socio-economic composition of Defence forces”.

The BJP had complained to the EC about Rahul alleging that if the Modi government returns to power, it will do away with the Constitution, and that the government had created two kinds of soldiers, referring to the Agniveer scheme.

Kharge, in his reply to the EC notice, had said that every statement of the Congress star campaigners were “well-justified”. “Out of the 25-minute election speech delivered by the star campaigner, the complainant has deliberately and wilfully extracted only specific portions, devoid of context, to mislead the Commission,” he had said.

The EC noted that Kharge had not explicitly denied the alleged statements.

“The MCC already takes into account the unevenness of power and authority between Opposition and ruling party and has the primary purpose to control and regulate the tempo and the quality of campaign speech… [it] does not allow unlimited extra space to the Opposition, bordering on an immunity from MCC provisions,” the EC order to Kharge said.

The poll panel said that as MPs and MLAs take an oath to bear allegiance to the Constitution, making statements that “anyone can either abolish or sell or tear apart the Constitution of India is alleged to be instilling fear in the mind of voters”. Since this may affect the prospects of certain candidates, such statements may “border as a corrupt practice” as defined in the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Later in the evening, Jairam Ramesh, Congress general secretary in-charge Communications, said in a post on X: “The ECI’s directions to both the INC and BJP complaints are a perfect example of how a Constitutional body is abdicating its responsibilities and showing undue deference to the party in power for the moment…”

“The Congress is campaigning to protect the Constitutional right of Dalits, Adivasis and OBCs to reservations. How on Earth can this be called casteist?”