Various Measures Already Adopted To Curb ‘Money Power’ In Elections: Election Commission Tells Supreme Court

The Election Commission of India on Thursday reassured the Supreme Court that it had, time and again, adopted various measures to curb the menace of ‘money power’ in elections, such as the election expenditure monitoring mechanism in place since the 2010 Bihar Assembly elections, and “will continue to do so”. The apex court was informed that the central regulatory body, being ‘seriously concerned’ about the increasing poll spending by political parties, had already introduced a ‘robust mechanism’ to keep the election expenditure within the statutory limit prescribed by the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 and to keep a check on excess or unaccounted expenditure by political parties or their members.This affidavit, sworn by Vijay Kumar Pandey, Director (Law), Election Commission of India, was submitted by the commission in response to a public interest litigation seeking directions to curb excessive poll spending“The Election Commission of India is seriously concerned about the increasing use of money power in elections. To curb this menace, the Election Commission of India has effectively and successively enforced the Election Expenditure Monitoring mechanism in the elections since the Genera' Elections to Bihar Legislative Assembly, 2010. In order to keep the election expenditure within the statutory limit prescribed under Rule 90 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 and also to curb excess expenditure/unaccounted expenditure, the Election Commission has introduced a robust mechanism for election expenditure monitoring during elections…The Election Commission has time and again adopted various measures to curb the menace of money power in elections and will continue to do so in future,” the affidavit states.The components of the extant monitoring mechanism, as highlighted in the affidavit, include the deployment of expenditure observers, assistant expenditure observers, video surveillance teams, video viewing teams, accounting teams, complaint monitoring and call centre, media certification and monitoring committee, and flying squads and static surveillance teams. Apart from this ‘expenditure sensitive’ constituencies and pockets, which are prone to greater instances of corruption and excessive poll spending, are also demarcated and kept under ‘close vigil’ by the Election Commission. The accounting teams maintain shadow observation register for each contesting candidate, and with every such register, a corresponding folder of evidence. Each candidate is also required to open a separate bank account for the sole purpose of election expenditures and maintain their own register in which daily accounts are systematically maintained. Further, election expenditure statements of every aspiring legislator are also uploaded on the website of the Election Commission or the chief electoral officer of the concerned state or union territory. Finally, it was pointed out in the affidavit that the services of central and state law enforcements agencies are routinely engaged, and their teams deployed to poll-bound states to monitor election expenditure.The petitioner prayed for an appropriate direction to the Election Commission to come up with a comprehensive plan of action to curb excess election expenditures with stringent and effective provisions of action against the erring candidates and political parties, Furthermore, the top court was urged to compel the commission to ‘earnestly’ examine election expenditures to ‘bring credibility and democratic reforms’. Calling the prayers ‘vague and half-baked’ and questioning the sincerity and public spiritedness of the petitioner, the commission has urged for the petition to be dismissed at the outset as unmaintainable. In particular, the regulatory body took objection to the petitioner’s appeal to the top court to mandate the formulation of a comprehensive plan of action to tackle the issue of burgeoning money power in elections. “The petitioner has not taken into account that such a mechanism already exists,” the affidavit points out. It is further stated that a former chief election commissioner and the author of the foreword of a report on which the petitioner has placed heavily reliance, has acknowledged that the reason for more money being seized today is the ‘increased vigilance and efforts’ by the Election Commission of India.Case TitlePrabhakar Deshpande v. The Chief Election Commissioner of India & Ors. | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1290 of 2021

Various Measures Already Adopted To Curb ‘Money Power’ In Elections: Election Commission Tells Supreme Court

Awstika Das

Tags