India’s Election Commissioner Appointments: Unpacking the Controversy and Criticism

The recent appointment of retired bureaucrats Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu as election commissioners has stirred both interest and controversy in India’s political landscape. This move, orchestrated by a high-level selection committee chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has significant implications given the timing, just weeks before the Lok Sabha polls.

The appointments followed the retirement of Anup Chandra Pandey, an EC, and the unexpected resignation of Arun Goel, leaving the Election Commission with only its chief election commissioner, Rajiv Kumar. The decision-making process, however, was not without its share of debates and dissent, particularly from panel member and Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury.

Chowdhury’s Dissent and Concerns

Chowdhury’s dissent note raised pertinent questions about the transparency and fairness of the selection process. He voiced concerns about the late provision of candidate names, receiving a list of 212 names the night before the meeting, and being presented with a shortlist of six candidates just before the selection committee convened.

The six shortlisted candidates included Utpal Kumar Singh, Pradeep Kumar Tripathi, Gyanesh Kumar, Indevar Pandey, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, and Sudhir Kumar Gangadhar Rahate, all of whom were former bureaucrats. Ultimately, Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu were chosen by a majority of the panel members.

Chowdhury’s objections extended to the absence of the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel, highlighting a departure from a Supreme Court judgment that advocated for the CJI’s inclusion until a new law was enacted by Parliament. This change in the composition of the committee under the new law raised concerns about transparency and adherence to established procedures.

In a press briefing following the selection committee meeting, Chowdhury expressed his disappointment with the appointment process, emphasizing the lack of clarity regarding candidate backgrounds, experience, and integrity. This lack of information contributed to what Chowdhury perceived as procedural lacunae in the selection of election commissioners.

Backgrounds of Kumar and Sandhu

The appointment of Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu comes with their own professional backgrounds and experiences. Gyanesh Kumar, a Kerala-cadre officer from the 1988 batch, retired as the secretary of the ministry of cooperation in January. He played significant roles in the home ministry, particularly during the period when Article 370 was abrogated in Jammu & Kashmir.

On the other hand, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, an Uttarakhand-cadre officer from the 1988 batch, currently serves as the secretary of Lokpal. He brings a wealth of experience from his tenure as the chief secretary of Uttarakhand and as the chairperson of the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI).

 Criticisms of the Selection Process

The selection process, governed by the new law, involves two committees: a search committee led by the law minister and a selection committee headed by the Prime Minister. Critics argue that this new law deviates from a Supreme Court judgment that recommended the inclusion of the CJI in the selection panel to ensure transparency.

Criticism also emerged regarding the timing of the appointments, with concerns raised about the government’s haste in making these decisions while related matters were pending before the Supreme Court. Critics argue that this rushed approach may have compromised the transparency and fairness of the appointment process.

Importance of Transparency and Fairness

Jagdeep Chhokar, a founding member and trustee of ADR, criticized the appointments, suggesting that the government should have waited for the Supreme Court’s decision before making such crucial appointments. He emphasized the importance of maintaining transparency and fairness in the selection of key positions.

In conclusion, while the appointment of Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu marks a significant development, it has also raised valid concerns about transparency, fairness, and adherence to established procedures in the selection process. The involvement of key stakeholders, including the Chief Justice of India, and a more transparent and inclusive approach could help address these concerns and strengthen the credibility of such appointments in the future.