When politics gets into the hands of corrupt and criminals, democracy loses its meaning. Democracy can retain its sanctity only when the politicians remain perfect.
The Indian democracy largely remained pure, despite a few impediments here and there, but lost its sanctity when Indira Gandhi imposed Emergency on the nation.
Since then democracy has been deteriorating steadily with the influx of crime and corruption. This resulted in the steady decline in the credibility of ‘independent’ institutions like the Police, CBI, Judiciary and now the Election Commission.
Navin Chawla must be a ‘bad omen’ as he came into the limelight during the darkest chapter of Independent India’s history, that is, Emergency. He had played extremely controversial roles, as a loyal servant of the Nehru family, during the Emergency taking commands from them and inflicting huge injuries on this nation (the scars will remain for ever).
He had also faced the worst kind of indictment from the Shah Commission, which probed the ‘excessive’ role of the executive during that period, dubbing him totally ‘unfit’ to hold any public office. But then, the demise of the Janata government in a short span of time had helped him to survive and he reaped the benefits for being loyal, the moment Indira came back to power and since then he has been climbing up the ladder to reach the present coveted level.
Within a few months of his appointment as Election Commissioner in May 2005, his allegiance to the Congress party in general and Nehru family in particular was exposed by the media and the opposition BJP/NDA duly took up the matter to the President’s office.
The memorandum, requesting for the removal of Navin Chawla, submitted to the then President Dr Abdul Kalam, was signed by more than 200 Members of Parliament belonging to NDA. The BJP, through Jaswant Singh, opposition leader in Rajya Sabha, followed it up with a petition in the Supreme Court in May 2006 praying for his removal.
As the Chief Election Commissioner Gopalaswami rightly filed an affidavit saying that he had the powers to remove any member of the EC for substantial reasons, the BJP withdrew the petition and forwarded it to the CEC.
The CEC, who has an impeccable track record and is known for his uprightness, has studied the complaints against Chawla and observed his conduct as the EC too, even while communicating with him asking for clarifications.
It has now come out in the open that it was Chawla who has actually deliberately delayed in responding and finally sent in his reply as late as December 2008.
Also, as an Election Commissioner, Chawla had tried to delay the Karnataka elections in favour of Congress party and roped in the External Affairs Ministry to bail out Sonia in the Belgium Monarchy’s Leopold Award episode.
Presumably, having satisfied with the authenticity of the complaints and not convinced by Chawla’s clarification, the CEC has promptly sent his recommendations to the President for his removal.
His action cannot be faulted, because, the Constitution (Clause 5 of Article 324) has entitled him and the Supreme Court had also affirmed the fact in the T N Seshan vs Union of India (1995) case.
But, it is not clear whether the President consulted the legal and Constitutional experts before forwarding the CEC’s letter to the Central government.
Considering the ‘indications’ from the Centre, it is most unlikely that Chawla will be removed. Meanwhile, a web portal has reported that the Union Minister for Women and Child Development Renuka Choudhury and Union Railway Minister
Lalu Prasad have tried to influence the CEC to delay the announcement of the poll dates, as they have some ‘beneficial schemes’ to be announced. It is obvious that they are worried about the ‘model code of conduct’, which
would come into effect after the announcement of poll dates. If Ministers have the gumption to attempt influencing an upright officer like Gopalaswami, one can imagine what will happen if they have a very pliable person like Navin Chawla at the helm of affairs in the EC.
Also Election Commissioner S Y Quareshi’s London announcement seems to be intended to help the UPA government, so that, it could make populist announcements before the beginning of the model code of conduct.
As, both Chawla and Quareshi seem to be flexible and lenient to the UPA government, the retirement of Gopalswami by 20 April will help a lot for the government if the general elections are held after 20 April with Chawla as the CEC.
As the present Parliament’s term ends in April, the general elections have to be held in April-May and the announcement has to be made before that by the CEC. Gopalaswami will certainly do that before retirement.
Now, a few questions remain: Was the President right in forwarding the CEC’s recommendation to the PMO? Can the PMO and the Centre sit on the CEC’s letter till his retirement? What will the NDA do? Will it approach the Supreme Court again? What will UPA do in the event of CEC’s recommendations based on authentic evidences against Chawla? Will Chawla have the decency to quit on his own on moral grounds? Will the government extend the tenure of CEC in the interest of the nation? Or will it bother about its own self-interests and keep Chawla as the CEC?
In this kind of a scenario, a general election under the stewardship of Chawla will be a mockery of democracy and may even prove to be disastrous for the nation. The nation must come out of it.
The Narasimha Rao government, which amended the Constitution to include two more Election Commissioners with a political motive to check T N Seshan, failed to anticipate a situation like the present, which has resulted in a conundrum now. The need of the hour is an extension to Gopalaswami’s term and the removal of Chawla. Will it happen?
