Ball in court: Election PILs and promises

The promises political parties make are spelled out in black and white before elections, but the common perception is that they are seldom realized. Making a political party fulfil the promises it made ahead of an election often needs another election.A PIL filed in the Gujarat high court aims to rein in loquacious politicians by making them accountable for what they promise the people before elections. It is seeking a ban on the issuing of manifestos by political parties. The petitioner, Jayesh Shah, managing trustee of an NGO called Sewa Gujarati, has urged the court to direct the Election Commission to frame guidelines regarding to manifestos and to act against parties for false promises made in them, if the issuing of manifestos is not itself banned.This PIL has been pending in the HC for more than a year now, and its next hearing will be on March 29. The petitioner contends that a party manifesto is nothing but a piece of paper without any accountabilty attached. Shah took exception to the slogans ‘Ek Bharat, Shreshtha Bharat’ and ‘Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas’ claiming that there no efforts were made to implement this agenda.Like this one, many other PILs have been filed seeking streamlining of the election process. Very few petitions of the myriad of pleas made to the judiciary regarding elections succeed.One PIL had sought to authenticate the credentials of election candidates by seeking directions that candidates attach proof for claims made while filing nominations. This was triggered by a few faulty declarations involving a couple of ministers in the past.There are also various groups of employees who approach the high court to evade poll duty. Other petitions seek protection for vehicles from being requisitioned, and then there are traders who object to seizures of cash in transit. In the last few years, the biggest number of PILs filed concerned the functioning of electronic voting machines and affiliated technologies like the voter-verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) system. Other PILs cast doubts on the credibility of polling techniques and demanded that the paper ballot system be restored. On failing to convince the high court, petitioners such as Patidar leader Reshma Patel have even approached the Supreme Court.OPPOSING PENALTIES FOR VOTERS WHO COMPLAIN: A PIL was filed last year seeking the removal of punitive provisions against voters whose claims about malfunctioning of EVM were proved wrong. Rule 49 MA of the Conduct of Elections Rules provides for criminal action against such a voter and he or she is booked under Section 177 of the IPC, for furnishing false information. A conviction entails a six-month jail term and a Rs 1,000 fine.CASH MOVEMENTS: With the model code of conduct in force in the run up to and during elections, limits on cash that can be carried in transit worries traders and businessmen. In November 2017, ahead of the assembly elections, the Gujarat Chamber of Commerce and Industry (GCCI) had filed a PIL and challenged the provisions by which police and elections officials intercept people, search them and seize cash if any is found in amounts above Rs 2.5 lakh. GCCI had challenged the constitutional validity of the election expense and monitoring compendium released in October 2017 by the ECI, which empowers police and election officials to conduct searches for money that is supposed to be taken to bribe or to be used illegally for election purposes. The HC dismissed the PIL on the grounds that the Supreme Court was also seized of a similar matter.NOTA IN LOCAL BODY POLLS IN 2015: It was on the directions of the Gujarat high court that the Election Commission introduced the “None Of The Above (NOTA)” option in elections to local bodies in 2015. This came after a PIL held that the rights given to a voter during the general elections must be available in local elections too. In fact, the in Gujarat in 2015 were held in time after the HC intervened and restrained the state government from delaying the process in the aftermath of the Patidar quota agitation.EXEMPTION FROM ELECTION DUTY: Recently, high court orders have exempted employees of the Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner from being engaged in election duty. A couple of years ago, employees of the Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) approached the HC and won a case against the government to ensure that they they cannot be called for electio0n duty. Time and again, various groups of employees including teachers of private schools have approachedthe HC against the EC’s mandate to have them participate in election work.DEMANDING TOUGHER PUNISHMENT FOR FALSE DECLARATIONS: Last year, a PIL filed by advocate K R Koshti demanded the scrapping of Section 125 of the Representation of the People Act, which prescribes six-month imprisonment for false declarations made by candidates in nomination papers. The lawyer insisted that Section 181 of the IPC should be made applicable in such cases, because it provides for a three-year jail term for the same offence, if committed by common man.