Saurav Das has stated that while the judiciary can examine petitions concerning actions taken by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, the accountability of the Election Commission should not solely rest within the court system. Speaking in New Delhi on September 28, Das emphasised that citizens should have the ability to access the courts but argued that the broader issue of accountability must be addressed democratically by the populace.

Das made his remarks through a post on X, amid rising petitions filed in the Supreme Court and various High Courts challenging the decisions made by Kumar. He cautioned against fully relying on judicial recourse, reminding citizens of past experiences where key issues remained unresolved within the legal framework.

Concerns Over Voter Rights Raised

In his commentary, Das referred to prior Supreme Court proceedings regarding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal. He highlighted comments made by Justice Joymalya Bagchi, emphasising the risk of disenfranchisement. Das expressed concern that voters unable to participate in elections may not have future opportunities, prompting questions about the implications of allegedly compromised electoral processes.

Through his critique, Das pointed out the precarious situation where vital electoral rights may be neglected, saying, “Who is to tell him that there is no ‘next time’ for a possibly stolen election?” This reflects a mounting apprehension concerning the integrity of the electoral system and its impact on voter confidence.

He reiterated that, while courts can proceed with petitions against the CEC and issue orders as per the law, the essential demand for accountability in the electoral process should not be relegated to judicial proceedings alone. Das asserts that the ultimate responsibility lies with the citizenry to hold the system accountable.

Internal Dynamics of the Election Commission Under Scrutiny

The context of Das’s statements arises amid ongoing controversies surrounding the operational effectiveness of the three-member Election Commission. An investigative report revealed that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had lodged documented objections regarding electoral roll management, voter registration, and related issues.

In response to these implications of internal discord, the Election Commission has maintained that such disagreements are part of standard institutional discussions. They asserted that all decisions, including those pertaining to the SIR exercise, were reached unanimously with the endorsement of all commissioners.

The situation highlights the tension between institutional governance and public confidence, as the functioning of the Election Commission faces scrutiny from both within and outside. Discussions around electoral integrity and public participation in the accountability process are more relevant than ever.

Citizens’ Role in Democracy Emphasised by Das

In his closing statements, Das reiterated that the ownership of Indian democracy ultimately lies with its citizens, asserting, “Because ultimately, neither an Election Commissioner nor a judge owns Indian democracy. We, the People, do.” This assertion serves to remind that while judicial examinations are a pathway, the foundational principles of democracy rest with the electorate.

By championing a citizen-centred approach to accountability, Das calls for a collective responsibility to safeguard democratic values, illustrating the importance of active public engagement in the electoral process. Ensuring that the voices of the electorate are heard remains paramount as India grapples with its electoral challenges.

Long or Short, get news the way you like. No ads. No redirections. Download Newspin and Stay Alert, The CSR Journal Mobile app, for fast, crisp, clean updates!

App Store –  https://apps.apple.com/in/app/newspin/id6746449540 

Google Play Store – https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.inventifweb.newspin&pcampaignid=web_share