Functioning of Election Commission not impartial: Bhupesh Baghel
Raipur, December 10
Former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister and senior Congress leader Bhupesh Baghel on Wednesday claimed that the functioning of the Election Commission of India (ECI) was "partial".
Speaking to reporters here, he argued that Leader of Opposition (LoP) Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi has raised the issue about duplication of votes in lakhs. Baghel said that voters' rights were being "looted".
"The functioning of the Election Commission is not impartial, and many examples have already proved it. The entire country is standing against it, and Rahul Gandhi has raised the issue in the Lok Sabha. Where are these duplicate votes in lakhs coming from? These are all examples due to which the elections are being influenced. The rights of the voters are not being stolen; they are being looted," Baghel said.
As Lok Sabha debates election reforms, Samajwadi Party (SP) MP Ram Gopal Yadav on Wednesday said that the real culprit causing "mischief" amid the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise was at the district level.
Speaking to ANI, he said the actual people responsible for "diverting votes" were part of the administration and worked like a political party. He added that only the Election Commission can't be blamed, but it must take action on complaints.
"Collectors and the Election Commission are responsible for conducting SIR, but the real culprits who are causing all the mischief are at the district level. I had told the Election Commission that you can issue any orders, but if the people sitting in Lucknow tell the Collector to cut the votes, no matter how much you say their votes should remain, they will get cut. We cannot just blame the Election Commission. The people connected to the administration who have started working like a party are the ones responsible for diverting these votes here and there," Yadav said.
This comes as Lok Sabha continues discussion on the SIR exercise initiated by the Election Commission of India (ECI) on the eighth day of the ongoing winter session of Parliament.
Senior Congress MP Manish Tewari opened the debate yesterday, with Leader of Opposition (LoP) Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi extending the discussion from the opposition side, levelling serious accusations that the EC is colluding with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to "shape elections".
Gandhi said that vote theft was an anti-national act.
A total of 10 hours has been earmarked for the entire discussion in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.
The upper house of Parliament is also set to take up discussion on electoral reforms after further discussion on the 150th anniversary of Vande Mataram on Wednesday.
In Rajya Sabha, Union Home Minister Amit Shah is likely to initiate the discussion on SIR.
The opposition parties were demanding a debate on SIR for months, with Congress alleging discrepancies in the voter list.
— ANI
Reader Comments
As an observer, it's concerning to see such a key democratic body being questioned by major opposition parties. The SP MP's point about district-level officials is interesting - the problem might be deeper than just the top commission. Hope the debate leads to concrete reforms.
While we must protect the integrity of elections, making sweeping statements about the EC being "partial" without providing all the evidence publicly can also erode trust. The debate in Parliament is the right forum. Let's wait for the government's response from Amit Shah ji.
Baghel sahab has a point. In my village during last state election, we found names missing and some names appearing twice. The local booth officer just shrugged. If the administration works like a party worker, what can the common voter do? This needs fixing before 2024.
Respectfully, I think the criticism is becoming too one-sided. The EC has conducted many elections smoothly. Instead of just blaming, the opposition should present specific, verifiable data on these "duplicate votes". Unsubstantiated claims don't help anyone.
The real issue is the SIR exercise at ground level. My didi's name was removed in the revision because she got married and changed address. The process is so cumbersome for ordinary people. The EC's intentions might be good, but the implementation is where the "loot" happens. 😔
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.