COGITO ERGO SUM

MAGNA CARTA
MAINS 2023
PAPER II CRASH COURSE

POLITY & GOVERNANCE : LEC 8C

GOOD GOVERNANCE
THEMATIC + SECTORAL BODIES

ATISH MATHUR OFFICIAL

 OFFICIAL SYLLABUS GOVERNANCE LECTURE PLAN

Constitutional Bodies Appointment to various COMMON SYLLABUS

Constitutional posts, Powers, Functions and
responsibilities of various Constitutional Bodies
Probity in Governance: Concept of public Lecture 6 : Development Policy
Statutory, regulatory and various quasi-judicial
service; Philosophical basis of governance
bodies,
and probity; Information sharing and
Salient features of the Representation of People’s
transparency in government, Right to Lecture 7 : Non State Actors
Act. (Integrated with ECI + Elections sub-theme)
Information, Codes of Ethics, Codes of
Important aspects of governance, transparency and
Conduct, Citizen’s Charters, Work culture,
accountability, e-governance- applications, models,
Quality of service delivery, Utilisation of
successes, limitations, and potential; citizens Lecture 8 : Good Governance &
public funds, Challenges of corruption
charters, transparency & accountability and Thematic Bodies
institutional and other measures.
Role of civil services in a democracy.
BODIES PYQs : 2013-2022
BODIES PYQs : 2013-2022
ELECTIONS & ROPA PYQs : 2013-2022
Good Governance PYQs : 2013-2022
 Corruption & Good Governance

1. Context :
a. Kautilya’s Arthashastra mentions public accountability, rotation of duties, trap- cases, and the accountability of the bribe giver, all concepts with enduring relevance. The continuation
of such practices brings forth the tenacity of corruption to survive down the ages and its potential to hollow out administrative institutions from within. The mechanisms of good
governance need to evolve on a continuous basis.
b. However, as per Corruption Perceptions Index 2022, India ranks at 85th among 180 countries. As such, India still has a long way from being a corruption-free country.
c. Corruption and good governance are two concepts that are closely related. Corruption is the abuse of public office for private gain, while good governance refers to the effective and
efficient management of public resources, the promotion of the rule of law, transparency, and accountability.
d. Corruption is seen as a major obstacle to good governance, as it undermines trust in public institutions, leads to the mismanagement of public resources and poor public service
delivery. In contrast, good governance promotes transparency, accountability, and the rule of law, which are essential for inclusive, effective, and equitable governance.
e. Governments can combat corruption and promote good governance by implementing policies and measures that promote transparency, accountability, and the rule of law.
Additionally, promoting ethical behaviour and transparency within the private sector can also contribute to the fight against corruption. Leveraging IT systems is a critical partner in
the move to combat corruption and good governance.
2. Principles of Good Governance:
a. Participation
b. Rule of Law
c. Transparency
d. Responsiveness
e. Consensus
f. Equity & Inclusiveness
g. Government Effectiveness & Delivery
h. Accountability
 Anti Corruption : Law & Legal Frameworks

Prevention of Corruption Act 2018 CAG

Constitution

CVC
Prevention of Money Laundering
Act, 2002
1. political, social, and economic
justice which can only be CBI ACBs
achieved by zero tolerance to
corruption Benami Transaction Act, 1988
2. FRs Article 15 and 16 pertaining
Lokpal & Lokayukta
to equal opportunity and
Article 19 and 21, right to life Central Civil Services (Conduct)
and dignity are for ensuring Rules, 1964 ED
corruption free governance
and administration
CDA Rules of PSUs and PSBs SFIO

Relevant Sections of IPC Right to Information Act, 2005

PIDPI Resolution CIC SIC

Companies Act: Vigil Mechanism Whistle Blowers Protection Act

 Prevention of Corruption Act 2018

1. Context : Special Act. It overrides the provision of general law viz. the code of criminal procedure. It is also a special Act in the sense that it covers almost all the aspects of prevention of
corruption.
2. Important Provisions
a. The term ‘ Public Servant’ is defined in the Act Section 2 (c) and covers all the government servants either paid or remunerated through fee or commission, servant of local authority,
servants of a Government Companies (either central orState), Judges, Arbitrator, Chairman, Members of any service Commissioner Board, Vice Chancellor, professor, reader, lecturer,
office bearer or an employee of an educational/scientific/social/cultural institutions receiving financial assistance from Government, President, Secretary or office bearer of a
registered society, persons involved in preparation, revision of electoral roll by virtue of office one holds etc.
i. Public duty is defined as ‘a duty in the discharge of which the State, the public or the community at large has an interest
b. Section 2 (d) of the Act defines ‘undue advantage’ as any gratification other than legal remuneration.
c. Section(s) 7 to 16 of the Act, define various offences and mention penalty applicable in case of each offence
d. Section 17 and 17-A puts restriction and lays down the provisions as to who all can investigate an offence under this Act
e. Section 17 A of the Act 2018 stipulates Pre-Investigation Approval of the relevant competent authority or government.
f. Section 19 stipulates previous sanction of competent authority both for serving and retired government servants. The provision of section 19 aims to balance two conflicting interests
viz. firstly, it has long been recognised that public servants, who take bona fide decisions, should be encouraged and provided protection in the event of false anonymous or
pseudonymous complaints/allegations or unsustainable inquiries initiated against them. It is aimed that investigation into an allegation of crime is not stifled at the threshold due to
the power wielded by a public servant.
i. While POCA Amendment Act binds such approving authority to pass its decision within three months, further extendable by a month, this may dilute the power of investigating
authorities from effectively prosecuting guilty officials.
ii. However, such prior sanction would not be required in the cases of arrest of officials caught ‘red-handed’ accepting or attempting to accept any undue advantage for himself or for
any other person.
iii. With a view to protect honest public servants, POCA Amendment Act has sought to restrict the scope of offences proposed to be covered under the POCA by identifying ‘criminal
misconduct’. This restricted definition no longer takes into account, previously covered grounds such as disregarding public interest, abusing his / her position, using illegal means,
etc. The element of criminal intent is added to lend more objectivity to enforcement.
iv. Requirement of prior sanction for retired public officials and change of scope of ‘criminal misconduct’ would encourage retiring bureaucrats to take faster decisions and the checks
and balances introduced in the amendment should protect such public officials.
g. Bribe-giving as an offence: Through this act, Bribe-giving was made offence with punishment of 7 years except when people are forced to give bribe. It will empower people to refuse to
give bribes.
h. Criminal Misconduct: Only two forms of criminal misconduct were included i.e. misappropriation of property entrusted to public servant and intentionally enriching oneself illicitly.
i. Confiscation of property: Under this act, there is provision to attach and confiscate the property.
j. Commercial organisations liable to be prosecuted.
k. Requires trial of offences to be held on a day to day basis and endeavour to conclude it within two years
 Prevention of Corruption Act 2018 : An International Perspective

1. POCA does not compare favourably in respect of standards of prosecution, guidelines or completeness, with corresponding laws in United States of America (‘USA’). United Kingdom (‘UK’)
or other international standards
a. failing to expand its scope to include corrupt practices amongst private entities, providing good corporate governance standards and guidelines and other failings
b. does not provide for prosecution of offences relating to international public officials or illegal gratification in transactions with private companies.
2. POCA makes no distinction between an illegal gratification and a facilitation payment. A payment is legal or illegal. This treatment applies to other laws and regulations in India as well.
3. Prosecution of public servants under POCA requires prior sanction of a competent authority.Obtaining such sanction itself in the past has been a hurdle to effective enforcement of the
law. Supreme Court noted the submissions of the Attorney General in Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. Dr. Manmohan Singh (2012) that out of 319 requests, sanction was awaited in respect of
126.
4. POCA does not have extra-territorial operation unlike certain other laws and its application is restricted to the territory of India. Unlike anti-corruption laws in other jurisdictions, POCA
does not recognise illegal gratification paid to foreign government officials or official of a public international organisation. Interestingly, POCA does not define the expressions ‘bribe’,
‘corruption’ or ‘corrupt practices’.
 Lokpal & Lokayuktas

1. Context :
a. Anti-corruption ombudsman Lokpal received 5,680 complaints during 2021-22, of which over 5,100 were yet to be registered,
b. Around 68% corruption complaints against public functionaries that landed with the Lokpal of India were “disposed off” without any action in the past four years. Only three
complaints were fully investigated, according to information provided by the Lokpal’s office to a parliamentary panel.
2. Composition :
a. Under the 2013 Act, the Lokpal should consist of a chairperson and such number of members, not exceeding eight, of whom 50% should be judicial members.
i. The selection procedure for these posts is the same as that for the chairperson. A search committee will prepare a panel of candidates, a selection committee will recommend
names from among this panel, and the President will appoint these as members.
b. The Act states that not less than 50% of the members of the Lokpal should be from among persons belonging to the SCs, the STs, OBCs, minorities and women. The same rules apply
members of the search committee.
c. Salaries, allowances and service conditions of the Lokpal chairperson will be the same as those for the Chief Justice of India; those for other members will be the same as those for a
judge of the Supreme Court.
3. Organisational Framework:
a. “Inquiry Wing, headed by the Director of Inquiry, for the purpose of conducting preliminary inquiry into any offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant punishable
under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988”.
b. “Prosecution Wing, headed by the Director of Prosecution, for the purpose of prosecution of public servants in relation to any complaint by the Lokpal under this Act”.
4. Mandate
a. For a wide range of public servants — from the Prime Minister, ministers and MPs, to groups A, B, C and D employees of the central government — various rules are in place.
b. If a complaint is filed against the Prime Minister, the Act says, “Lokpal shall inquire or cause an inquiry to be conducted into any matter involved in, or arising from, or connected with,
any allegation of corruption made in a complaint”. However, certain conditions will apply.
i. The Act does not allow a Lokpal inquiry if the allegation against the Prime Minister relates to international relations, external and internal security, public order, atomic energy and
space.
ii. Complaints against the Prime Minister are not to be probed unless the full Lokpal bench considers the initiation of an inquiry and at least two-thirds of the members approve it
iii. Such an inquiry against the Prime Minister (if conducted) is to be held in camera and if the Lokpal comes to the conclusion that the complaint deserves to be dismissed, the records
of the inquiry are not to be published or made available to anyone.
iv. It shall apply to public servants in and outside India,” it states. It clarifies that “a complaint under this Act shall only relate to a period during which the public servant was holding
or serving in that capacity.”
5. Lokayuktas
a. These are the state equivalents of the central Lokpal
b. Establishment of the institution of the Lokayukta including any appointment therein falls within the domain of the states.
c. KN Case Study : Evolution of Dilution
 Lokpal & Lokayuktas : Analysis

1. Appointments
a. The L&L Act provides for the appointment of the chairperson and members of the Lokpal by the president based on the recommendations of a committee consisting of the Prime
Minister (chairperson), speaker of the Lok Sabha, the leader of opposition (LoP) in the Lok Sabha, the chief justice of India (CJI) or a judge of the Supreme Court nominated by them and
an eminent jurist, as recommended by the chairperson and other members.
b. After the 2014 general elections, no one was recognised as the LoP in the Lok Sabha. In order to ensure a balanced selection committee in keeping with the spirit of the legislation, the
government needed to bring a single amendment to modify the composition of the selection committee by substituting the recognised LoP with the leader of the single largest
opposition party in the Lok Sabha.
c. Supreme Court held that in light of subsection (2) of Section 4 of L&L Act, which states that the appointment of chairperson or a member of the Lokpal will not become invalid merely
because of any vacancy in the selection committee, the L&L Act was an eminently workable piece of legislation and the appointment could be made with a truncated selection
committee without the LoP.
d. The Prime Minister, speaker, and the CJI appointed Mukul Rohatgi, who served as Attorney General during the BJP regime, as the eminent jurist on the selection panel. In the absence
of the LoP, the selection of the chairperson and members of the Lokpal came under a cloud with doubts arising about an inherent bias towards the selection of candidates favoured by
the government.
e. Mallikarjun Kharge, leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha, was invited for the meetings of the selection committee as a “special invitee.” He declined8 the invite on the
grounds that a special invitee “would not have any rights of participation in the process of selection.”
f. The composition of the selection committee, and the lack of transparency in the selection process by which the chairperson and members of the Lokpal were finally appointed in
March 2019, have raised doubts about the independence of the Lokpal.
2. The 2016 Amendments
a. The Lokpal has been established to receive and inquire into complaints related to offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PCA).
b. One of the grounds of criminal misconduct under the PCA relates to a public servant, or any person on their behalf, being in possession of pecuniary resources or property
disproportionate to their known sources of income.
c. As illegally amassed assets are often handed over to family members, Section 44 of the L&L Act required all public servants under the jurisdiction of the Lokpal to declare their assets
and liabilities and those of their spouses and dependent children. These were required to be proactively disclosed on government websites. Public disclosure of assets and liabilities of
public servants was important to ensure that people could make informed complaints to the Lokpal.
d. The government introduced amendments to the L&L Act in Parliament on 27 July 2016, to dilute the provision related to asset disclosure and the amendment bill was hurriedly pushed
through
i. The amendments severely diluted the asset disclosure provisions of the Lokpal Act. The amended Section 44 of the law allows for the form and manner of disclosure of assets and
liabilities of public servants to be prescribed by the central government through rules.
e. The need for a thorough asset disclosure regime for public servants is globally recognised as an important element in an anti-corruption framework (World Bank 2012). Despite
overwhelming public interest in comprehensive disclosure of assets, the 2016 amendments diluted the relevant provisions.
 Lokpal & Lokayuktas : Way Forward

1. First, the issue of the constitution of a balanced selection committee, which does not have a majority representation from the ruling party, must be addressed. The composition of the
selection panel needs to be appropriately amended to provide for the inclusion of the leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha as a member of the committee, in case no
one is recognised as the LoP. The provision allowing a truncated selection committee to make appointments needs to be removed as it has the potential to be misused.
2. Second, the selection committee must adopt a robust procedure to ensure transparency in the appointment process as envisaged in Section 4(4) of the L&L Act. The procedure should
mandate public disclosure of particulars of applicants, shortlisting criteria, records of deliberations, including minutes of meetings of the search and selection committee and material
showing how the selected candidates fulfil the eligibility criteria. All records pertaining to the appointment of the chairperson and members of the Lokpal made in 2019 must also be
placed in the public domain to enable scrutiny of the appointment process.
3. Third, there is an urgent need to undo the regressive amendments made to the asset disclosure provision in Section 44. The Lokpal must mandate a robust system of asset disclosures for
public servants, their spouses and dependent children and these should be publicly available to enable people to participate in the fight against graft by making informed complaints.
4. Fourth, much of the corruption that affects common people, especially the poor and marginalised, is in state and local government agencies. Therefore, it is important to have effective
Lokayuktas set up at the state level, along the same lines as the Lokpal at the centre. The Parliamentary Standing Committee had examined the issue of desirability and constitutional
validity of a single federal law providing for setting up of the Lokpal at the centre and Lokayuktas in states. It recommended a single statute to provide uniform standards across the
country. As the Lokpal was being set up to meet commitments under the United Nations Convention against Corruption ratified by India, the committee opined that Article 253 of the
Constitution14 empowered Parliament to enact a legislation which would be binding on states as well.
5. Finally, the L&L Act was legislated to address the problem of the lack of an adequately independent and empowered body to look into allegations of corruption involving high-ranking
government functionaries who can influence action in cases involving allegations of graft. However, Section 14 of the act, which lists the categories of public servants against whom the
Lokpal would receive complaints of corruption, extends the definition to include functionaries of entities that are wholly or partly financed by the government with an annual income
above ₹ 1 crore (DoPT 2016b), and of entities receiving donations from foreign sources in excess of 10 lakh per year. Covering such a large number of persons under the jurisdiction of the
Lokpal is wholly undesirable as it would inundate the institution with complaints and prevent proper action in cases of big-ticket corruption.

Corruption involving high-ranking public officials is usually of a complex and intricate nature and, therefore, the Lokpal has been set up as a specialised agency with appropriate
mechanisms to deal with it. Burdening the Lokpal with complaints against lakhs of persons associated with private, non-governmental bodies who do not exercise the kind of influence and
power which high-ranking public functionaries do, will distract the agency and dilute its efficacy, thereby defeating the basic purpose for setting it up. The act, therefore, needs to be
amended to remove such functionaries from the definition of public servants under the law
 Elections - Framework

1. Context : India is both the largest and one of the most populous democracies in the world. This apart, in comparison to most of the developed democracies of the world, problems of
illiteracy, poverty, etc. still continue in India as is the case with most of the developing countries. Its electorate is not only vast but also quite diverse reflecting the plurality of caste,
religion, region, language, etc. of its social mosaic. Conducting periodic elections in the country by encouraging large-scale popular participation is a stupendous task
2. Electoral Process: General Elections at a glance
a. The election to the Lok Sabha being direct, the territory of India is divided into territorial constituencies for the election. At present, the allocation of seats in the Lok Sabha is based on
1971 Census and will continue to be so till 2026. The term of the Lok Sabha, unless dissolved sooner is five years from the date appointed for its first meeting.
3. Election Commission of India
a. The Constitution entrusts the responsibility to supervise, direct and control the entire procedure and machinery for election and also for some other ancillary matters, on the Election
Commission of India under Article 324
b. At present, it constitutes the CEC and two Election Commissioners. The Election Commission has the power of superintendence, direction and control of all elections to Parliament
and the State Legislature and to the offices of the President and Vice President.
i. A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court in 2023, unanimously ruled that a high-power committee consisting of the Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, and the
Chief Justice of India must pick the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs), till Parliament enacts a law
ii. On the issue of whether the process of removal of Election Commissioners must be the same as it is for the CEC, the Court ruled that it cannot be the same. The Constitution states
that the CEC can be removed in a process similar to a judge — through a majority in both houses of Parliament on grounds of proven incapacity or misbehaviour.
c. There has been a marked increase in the total number of candidates contesting the elections. While in 1952, 1864 candidates contested for 489 elective seats, in 2019, 8026
candidates were in the fray for 543 seats.
4. First-Past-the-Post-System : Of all the candidates contesting, it is the one who wins largest number of votes as compared to all others individually, gets elected.
a. Universal Adult Franchise :
i. While the Constitution under article 326 makes it one of the cardinal features of the electoral system, the Representation of People Act, 1950 vide its Section 23 effectuates it.
ii. There shall be one electoral roll for every territorial constituency for election to either House of Parliament or to the State Legislature and no person shall be excluded from such
roll on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex or any of them”.
b. Multiparty System
i. Increase in the number of regional parties from time to time as a result of multiparty system that is followed in India in comparison to byparty system in many countries. Alongside,
there has been a substantial increase in the number of independent candidates. This has impinged upon the stability of Government in power. Moreover, this has also helped the
phenomena of political defections, coalition politics, etc.
 Elections - Reforms

1. Context : "No office in the land is more important than that of being a citizen." -Felix Frankfurter
a. The need for electoral reforms was increasingly felt towards the late 1960‟s in India. There was one party rule at the Centre and in most of the States. But this scenario began to
change after the Fourth General elections held in 1967. Regional parties and rule by coalition of parties began to emerge in the States. The emergence of alternative party governments
in the State witnessed the accentuation of some of the negative traits and distortions in the political system which manifested themselves in a greater degree in electoral politics.
b. A parliamentary Committee was constituted for the first time in 1970 to suggest amendments to Election Law from all angles
c. In subsequent years, a number of Committees viz. the Tarkunde Committee (1974), the Dinesh Goswami Committee (1990), V.K. Krishna Iyer Committee (1994) and the Indrajit Gupta
Committee (1998) have been constituted to examine issues relating to electoral reforms. Apart from these, the Election Commission has also, from time to time, made proposals for
reforms. Starting from 1970, the Election Commission has submitted its recommendations on electoral reforms in 1977, 1982, 1990, 1992 and 2004.
d. This apart, political parties through the platform of all-party meetings have also suggested for electoral reforms.
e. The Law Commission (i.e. the 15th Law Commission) was also constituted in November, 1977 for an exhaustive study of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 with a view to
finding out and identifying the measures necessary in the direction of electoral reforms.
f. The Law Commission has submitted its 170th report regarding reform of the Election System.
g. In addition, Government has also initiated redemptive measures from time to time.
2. Data
a. According to the association of Democratic Reforms nearly half of the 17th Lok Sabha members have criminal charges against them.
b. 29 per cent elected members of 17th Lok Sabha have criminal cases of rape, murder, attempt to murder and crime against women
c. Since 2009, 109 per cent has increased in the number of MPs with serious criminal cases.
d. 22,641 Electoral Bonds worth 12979.0977 crore sold from March 2018 to April 2023
 Elections - Law Commission Suggestions

1. Context: The Supreme Court of India, in the matter of Public Interest Foundation & Others V. Union of India, directed the Law Commission of India to make suggestions on two specific
issues,
a. curbing criminalisation of politics and needed law reforms
b. impact and 7 consequences of candidates filing false affidavits and needed law reforms to check such practice
i. Commission : 244th Report titled „Electoral Disqualification‟ on 24th February 2014 to the Government of India.
2. Election Finance
a. As limits; disclosure obligations of individual candidates and political parties; and penalties imposable on political parties; as well as examining the issue of state funding of elections.
b. The electoral bond scheme introduced in 2018 is a method of political funding. It aimed at ensuring enhanced accountability to defeat the growing menace of black money and to
promote transparency in funding and donations received by the political parties
c. Only a political party registered of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and which has secured more than one per cent of the votes polled in the last election to the Lok Sabha
would be eligible to receive the bonds.
d. The Commission does not consider a system of complete state funding of elections or matching grants to be feasible, given the current conditions of the country.
3. Regulation of Political Parties and Inner Party Democracy
a. Democratic theory can be thought of to include accounts of both procedural and substantive democracy. Procedural democracy can be said to refer to the practice of universal adult
franchise, periodic elections, secret ballot, while substantive democracy can be said to refer to the internal democratic functioning of the parties, which purportedly represent the
people
4. Proportional Representation
a. It is clear that both the electoral systems come with their own merits and demerits – proportional representation theoretically being more representative, while the FPTP system being
more stable. It is also clear, from the experience of other countries that any changes in India‟s electoral system will have to follow a hybrid pattern combining elements of both direct
and indirect elections. This, in turn will necessitate an increase in the number of seats in the Lok Sabha, which raises concerns regarding its effective functioning.
5. Anti Defection Law in India
a. The Law Commission recommends a suitable amendment to the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, which shall have the effect of vesting the power to decide on questions of
disqualification on the ground of defection with the President or the Governor, as the case may be, (instead of the Speaker or the Chairman), who shall act on the advice of the ECI. This
would help preserve the integrity of the Speaker‟s office.
b. The Court made two important declarations. First, the Speakers of both the State Assemblies and the Parliament have to decide on disqualification petitions for members within three
months except for the existence of an extraordinary circumstance. It also held that courts have the powers to intervene if the proceedings are delayed. Second, the court
recommended to Parliament that it strongly considers removing the Speakers‟ disqualification powers and forming an independent tribunal to take up these petitions. The rationale
for this suggestion is that Speakers invariably come from the ruling parties and act in a partisan manner.
6. Preparation and Use of Common Electoral Rolls
a. The Law Commission endorses the ECI‟s suggestions regarding the introduction of common electoral rolls for Parliamentary, Assembly and local body elections.
 1. Strengthening the office of the Election Commission of India
a. The ECI should be strengthened by first, giving equal constitutional protection to all members of the Commission in matters of removability; second, making the appointment process
of the Election Commissioners and the CEC consultative; and third, creating a permanent, independent Secretariat for the ECI.
2. Paid News and Political Advertisements
a. Amendment in the RP Act 1951, to provide therein that publishing and abetting the publishing of „paid news‟ for furthering the prospect of election of any candidate or for
prejudicially affecting the prospect of election of any candidate be made an electoral offence under chapter-III of part-VII of RP Act, 1951 with punishment of a minimum of two years
imprisonment. In order to curb the practice of disguised political advertisement, disclosure provisions should be made mandatory for all forms of media.
3. Opinion Polls
a. Under Section 126 of Representation of the People Act, 1951, which prohibits, apart from holding, convening or attending any public meeting or procession, “display to the public any
election matter by means of cinematography, television or other similar apparatus”, during the period of forty-eight hours ending with the hour fixed for the conclusion of the poll.
Contravention of the above prohibition is a penal offence punishable with imprisonment upto 2 years or with fine or with both.
4. Compulsory Voting
a. The Law Commission does not recommend the introduction of compulsory voting in India and in fact, believes it to be highly undesirable for a variety of reasons described above such
as being undemocratic, illegitimate, expensive, unable to improve quality political participation and awareness, and difficult to implement.
5. Election Petitions
a. Wide-ranging reforms have been suggested by the Election Commission to deal with “disputes regarding elections”.
6. NOTA and the Right to Reject
a. The Law Commission currently rejects the extension of the NOTA principle to introduce a right to reject the candidate and invalidate the election in cases where a majority of the votes
have been polled in favour of the NOTA option.
7. The Right to Recall
a. The Law Commission is not in favour of introducing the right to recall in any form because it can lead to an excess of democracy, undermines the independence of the elected
candidates, ignores minority interests, increases instability and chaos, increases chances of misuse and abuse, is difficult and expensive to implement in practice, especially given that
India follows the first past the post system.
8. Totaliser for Counting of Votes
a. The Commission reiterates and endorses the ECI‟s suggestion for introducing a totaliser for the counting of votes recorded in electronic voting machines to prevent the harassment of
voters in areas where voting trends in each polling station can be determined. Prior to the introduction of EVMs, ballot papers could be mixed under Rule 59A of the Election Rules,
although this was not permitted for EVMs. Using a totaliser would increase the secrecy of votes during counting, thus preventing the disclosure of voting patterns and countering fears
of intimidation and victimisation.
9. Restriction on Government Sponsored Advertisements
a. The Law Commission recommends an amendment of section 33(7) of the RPA, which permits a candidate to contest any election (parliamentary, assembly, biennial council, or bye-
elections) from up to two constituencies. In view of the expenditure of time and effort; election fatigue; and the harassment caused to the voters, section 33(7) should be amended to
permit candidates to stand from only one constituency.
10. Independent Candidates
a. The Law Commission recommends that independent candidates be disbarred from contesting elections because the current regime allows a proliferation of independents, who are
mostly dummy/non-serious candidates or those who stand (with the same name) only to increase the voters‟ confusion. Thus, sections 4 and 5 of the RPA should be amended to
provide for only political parties registered with the ECI under section 11(4) to contest Lok Sabha or Vidhan Sabha elections.
 Issue Based Reforms

1. Criminalisation of Politics
a. The sovereign of India is crippled by these criminal elements who uses threat, intimidation, violence and even sexual assault to win the election.
b. Over the last two decades, the influence of criminals in the political arena has shown a tremendous increase. Earlier these criminal elements used to influence the elections from
outside but now they have become a part of the political system by contesting the elections themselves. Once an accused is elected during the trial, he uses his position and power to
dilute the case or pressurises the government to withdraw the prosecution against him or her.
c. All recent committees on politics and electoral reform have observed the criminalisation of our political system almost unanimously. Criminalisation of politics has many forms, but
perhaps the most alarming among them is the significant number of elected representatives with criminal charges pending against them.
d. The Vohra Committee Report on Criminalisation of Politics was constituted to identify the extent of the politician-criminal nexus and recommend ways in which the menace can be
combated.
e. According to an analysis by the Association for Democratic Reforms, more than 30 percent of current Lok Sabha MPs have declared criminal charges including serious criminal charges
like murder, kidnapping etc.
i. Association for Democratic Reforms vs Union of India (2003) : Disclosure of criminal antecedents of candidates
ii. ECI - An amendment should be made to Section 125A of the R.P. Act, 1951 to provide for more stringent punishment for concealing or providing wrong information on Form 26 of
Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 to minimum two years imprisonment and removing the alternative punishment of assessing a fine upon the candidate
iii. ECI - Form 26 be amended to include all items from the additional affidavit prescribed by the Election Commission, add a column requiring candidates to disclose their annual
declared income for tax purpose as well as their profession.
iv. Lily Thomas Judgement - Conviction from a lower court also leads to a time bound ban
f. Since an overwhelming majority of candidates are put up by political parties, and political parties also campaign for candidates including spending money on their campaigns, it is
logical that the parties take responsibility and vouch for the candidates‘ antecedents.
i. ADR therefore recommend that the information submitted in the affidavits by the candidates should be certified by Political Parties.
ii. Information given by candidates in their affidavits will be cease to have any useful effect if its correctness and accuracy are not ensured. It is therefore recommended that the
information given in the affidavits of the candidates on criminal charges, assets etc. should be verified by an independent central authority in a time bound manner
g. The Election Commission of India recommended, as far back as 1998, that candidates with pending criminal cases against them not be allowed to contest elections. It reiterated that
recommendation in 2004
h. The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) (2001) - Any person convicted for any heinous crime like murder, rape, smuggling, dacoity, etc. should be
permanently debarred from contesting for any political office
i. The Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2008) : Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 needs to be amended to disqualify all persons facing charges related
to grave and heinous offences and corruption, with the modification suggested by the Election Commission‖
 Issue Based Reforms

1. Money Power in Elections

a. It is widely believed that in many cases successfully contesting an election costs a significant amount of money that is often much greater than the prescribed limits.
b. There has been, and continues to be, a general clamour, particularly by political leaders, that election expenditure limits are too low, and that these should be increased (these have
since been increased)
c. Majority of the candidates contesting elections declared, in their election expenditure statements submitted to the Election Commission, that they had spent between 45% to 55% of
the limit. Only a few candidates declared having spent between 90 and 95% of the limit.
d. A large number of candidates and political parties often complain about the limits being unrealistically low, and seek a revision. The Election Commission of India is often blamed for
keeping the limits too low. The fact however is that these limits are fixed by the Ministry of Law and Justice, Legislative Department, under Rule 90 of Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961.
Only the government has the power to amend these rules..
e. It has often been suggested by many people including politicians, and also former Chief Election Commissioners, that the limits really do not seem to serve any purpose and should be
abolished. There are however legitimate concerns about the excessive use of ―money power‖ in the electoral process, causing severe distortions in the basic functioning of
democracy in the country.
f. The high cost of elections creates a high degree of compulsion for corruption in the public arena, that the sources of some of the election funds are believed to be unaccounted
criminal money in return for protection, unaccounted funds from business groups who expect a high return on this investment, kickbacks or commissions on contracts, etc., and that
Electoral compulsions for funds become the foundation of the whole super structure of corruption.
g. In view of the increasing cost of the election campaigns, it is desirable that the existing ceiling on election expenses for the various legislative bodies be suitably raised to a reasonable
level reflecting the increasing costs. However, this ceiling should also apply to the political parties. As of now, there is no limit on how much a political party can spend on elections
i. . For example, in the 2014 Lok Sabha election, 33% of the candidates who declared assets of Rs 5 crore and above were elected, whereas less than 1% of candidates with declared
assets of less than 10 lakh were elected.
h. Another recommendation that has been suggested by previous committees to reduce the cost of elections is state funding of elections. The idea is to establish such conditions where
even the parties with modest financial resources may be able to compete with those who have superior financial resources.
i. Political parties should implement CIC’s order and be open for public scrutiny under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005
 Issue Based Reforms

1. Misuse of caste and religion for electoral gains

a. This has been the subject for discussion from time to time. The use of religion, caste, community, tribe, and any other form of group identity for electoral gain or for gathering political
support should not be allowed and the Representation of the People Act, 1951,be suitably amended to give the Election Commission powers to take deterrent actions against those
candidates and political parties who resort to it, such actions should include, but not limited to, disqualifying candidates from contesting elections and de-registering the offending
political parties. Political parties should also not be allowed to use overtly religious, caste, community, tribe, and other such expressions and words in their names.
2. Regulating Political Parties
a. It is a desirable objective to promote the progressive polarisation of political ideologies and to reduce less serious political activity. The Election Commission should progressively
increase the threshold criterion for eligibility for recognition so that the proliferation of smaller parties is discouraged. There are more than 1600 political parties registered with the
ECI, however, only a few ever contest elections. ECI should be authorised to de-register such parties, which do not contest elections.
3. Political Reforms
a. Institutionalization of political parties: Need for a comprehensive legislation to regulate party activities, criteria for registration as a national or State party, derecognition of parties.
b. Structural and organizational reforms: Party organizations-- National, State and local levels; Inner party democracy-- regular party elections, recruitment of party cadres, socialization,
development and training, research, thinking and policy planning activities of the party.
c. Party system and governance: Mechanisms to make parties viable instruments of good governance.
4. Financial transparency in political parties
a. This is also one of the fundamental deeper political reforms that is a necessary precondition that must be satisfied before any meaningful electoral reforms can actually take place on
the ground. Bulk of the donations are currently from unknown sources of funds and the introduction of ‘Electoral Bonds’ has made the financial transparency even more opaque than
earlier. Political parties should be required to maintain proper accounts in predetermined account heads and such accounts should be audited by auditors recommended and
approved by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG), and available for the information of the public