Can Election Commission check use of religion in polls?

The infamous Gujarat riots have made headlines once more. Home Minister Amit Shah evoked its memory. Speeches in recent election rallies clearly indicate the BJP's desperation to polarize people along religious lines. The BJP is talking about repealing Article 370, the Citizens Amendment Act (CAA), and the Common Civil Code. Everyone knows that all these issues are insignificant and can only be used as effective polarizing tools. It is hardly difficult to answer why there is such desperation.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who popularised the Gujarat Model across the country, never mentions the model that propelled him to power. Though the Congress has failed to highlight the fact that the model was a fiction rather than a reality, various indicators on the Human Development Index only testify to it. The fact is that polarization has been the main tool that has helped Modi retain the crown. The communal passion seems to be waning.

If we go back to the Vajpayee era, we can sketch the changes the BJP has undergone during all these years. Noted journalist and human rights activist Kuldip Nayar writes, " During the riots, the New York Times got hold of transcripts of conversations between the police control room and officers on the streets. The advice was to allow Muslim houses to burn and to prevent aid from reaching the victims. Elsewhere in Gujarat, it was worse. The police instigated and protected the rioters."

He records the dilemma of the then BJP and the government. Many in the BJP believed occurrences such as in Gujarat would consolidate Hindus on its side. A few, like the prime minister and foreign minister, Jaswant Singh, believed otherwise but remained silent. They were afraid of the RSS hardliners, who had initiated the thesis of Hindu consolidation and found no fault with Modi, an RSS pracharak.

The dilemma that Nayar has described no longer exists in the BJP. By now, the party is completely monolithic, and no section of the party disapproves of Shah's claims that the BJP taught a "lesson" to the rioters in 2002 and established lasting peace in the State. The remorse expected from the party on lapses in controlling post-Godhra violence and massacres of minorities is absent, and in its place, the party is evoking communal passions for electoral gains. Do we expect it from the country's home minister?

It has rightfully enraged opposition parties and civil society. Some have approached the Election Commission of India to take action against Shah for violating the People's Representation Act, 1951. They say that this also violates Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code, which prohibits promoting enmity between different groups on the grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, or language. The crime under this section may also result in disqualification. Who will punish the violators?

The Supreme Court has exposed how the Election Commission of India, enforcer of the Model Code of Conduct, is too weak in its constitution to shoulder the responsibility. During the hearing on the petition seeking guidelines for the appointment of Election Commissioners, the court hardly hesitated in expressing its displeasure with the functioning of the Commission. The court wanted the ECI to work along the lines of TN Seshan, the man who changed the role of the commission in such a manner that fearful political leaders and parties avoided violating any guidelines for free and fair elections.

The Supreme Court forced the government to show documents related to the appointment of new Election Commissioner Arun Goel. The court called the appointment into question, saying it was made with 'lightning speed' and 'haste'.

The Court observed, "On 18th November, we hear the case. This was moved on the same day. The Union law minister forwards four shortlisted names, which are examined. Then the Prime Minister comes in and recommends his name on the same day. Why is it done in such haste, with such tearing urgency?"

"Same-day process, same-day clearance—what kind of evaluation is this? We are not questioning Arun Goel's credentials, but the process," the court said.

Though the court has avoided commenting on the credentials of the new Election Commissioner, is it difficult to decipher his leanings? He is the bureaucrat who is said to have conceived the idea of Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotasva, the project that largely aims at rewriting the history of the freedom struggle by showing Congress and its leaders in a poor light. The project is also part of the RSS' attempt to whitewash the negative contribution of Hindutva forces to the independence struggle.

How can the Election Commission be expected to remain impartial when its members are ideologically motivated?

"The state, being secular in character will not identify itself with any one of the religions or religious denominations. This necessarily implies that religion will not play any role in the governance of the country, which must at all times be secular in nature. Election is a secular exercise just as the functions of the elected representatives must be secular in both outlook and practice," the Supreme Court ruled in a judgement in 2017.

"So interpreted, religion, race, caste, community, or language would not be allowed to play any role in the electoral process, and should an appeal be made on any of those considerations, the same would constitute a corrupt practice," the ruling further says.

The Election Commission had circulated the relevant portions of the ruling to all recognized political parties within a month and asked for "strict compliance." The Commission had also pointed out that "soliciting votes in the name of religion, caste, etc." may also fall within the ambit of the Model Code of Conduct.

Have we seen, in recent years, any examples of the Commission enforcing its pronouncement on keeping elections strictly secular?

(The author is a senior journalist. He has experience of working with leading newspapers and electronic media including Deccan Herald, Sunday Guardian, Navbharat Times and Dainik Bhaskar. He writes on politics, society, environment and economy)