The unopposed elections in recent Lok Sabha constituencies underscore growing concerns over the erosion of democratic norms.

The unopposed election of the Bharatiya Janata Party candidate from the Surat Lok Sabha constituency and efforts for a similar kind of replay from the Indore constituency may have brought joy in the BJP camp, but such developments are not conducive to a healthy democracy.

BJP’s Mukesh Dalal was declared elected after the Surat District Election Officer declared the candidature of the Congress candidate Nilesh Kumbhani invalid, as the signatures of his proposers could not be verified. The same happened with his covering candidate and the candidate of the Bhartiya Samajwadi Party.

By no means a coincidence, all the independents then withdrew to pave the way for the unopposed election of Dalal. The way the entire operation was handled leaves little doubt about a larger conspiracy, which might include collusion of the rival candidates. Congress has declared that it would challenge the election, but the damage has already been done.

The Indore constituency is also facing an almost similar, if not worse, crisis. This time, the Congress candidate Akshay Kanti Bam withdrew his candidature after the last date of withdrawal, leaving the Congress without any candidate in the field.

Although the situation is still fluid, perhaps the only option the Congress would have is to support an independent candidate from the constituency. However, given the mechanizations in Surat, there would be little shock if all other candidates in the fray also decide to extend support to the BJP candidate or withdraw from the contest.

The reported cause behind Akshay Kanti Bam withdrawing his candidature – and seen in the company of BJP leaders – is a local court charging him in an old case of murder.

The implications are even worse than those of the Surat drama. Does it mean that the candidate feels assured that he would be taken off the hook if he joins the BJP?

The implications are obviously very serious and involve interference in the judicial process. While the weaponization of the Income Tax Department, Enforcement Directorate, and the Central Bureau of Investigation is now common knowledge, involving the judiciary in partisan issues is very serious and dangerous.

These incidents of unopposed elections, marked by candidate disqualifications, withdrawals, and allegations of collusion, underscore the need for transparency and fairness in the electoral process.

It is certainly not the first time that candidates have been elected unopposed to the Lok Sabha. There have been more than 30 instances in the past when unopposed elections have been held across the country. Congress has been the largest beneficiary, with 20 of its candidates getting elected unopposed – most of them during the first four parliamentary elections. Most of these candidates were of high stature and were elected with political consensus.

In the recent past, former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav had to vacate his Lok Sabha seat after taking over as chief minister in 2012.

In the ensuing by-elections, his wife Dimple Yadav was fielded. None of the major opposition parties like the Congress, BSP, and RLD put up their candidates against her.

The BJP later accused that its candidate was prevented from filing nomination, while the Samajwadi Party claimed that the BJP had asked its candidate to withdraw. The exact situation remains unclear to this day.

But while in almost all cases, other parties had not put up any candidates, it is for the first time that all candidates, except that of the BJP, were either disqualified or had withdrawn after the final list of candidates was declared. Even a child would smell a conspiracy behind the developments.

Another significant question that would be decided by the higher judiciary later is what happened to the option of None Of The Above (NOTA). This option was not available until 2013. It was introduced at the directive of the Supreme Court. In response to an application, the apex court has now issued a notice to the Election Commission on whether it can deny the right given to the voters.

The Election Commission, which has become a handmaiden of the ruling dispensation, has turned a blind eye to such developments. Recently it diluted its own authority and exposed its fright when it issued notices for breach of the Moral Code of Conduct to the political parties concerned instead of the individual leaders who violated the code in the past.

The reason was obvious – the complaint was against none other than the Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who had spoken about “infiltrators” and “those who have more children,” leaving no one in doubt over who he was referring to. Of course, to balance out its notices, the Commission also sent a notice to the Congress for a “false comment” made by Rahul Gandhi on the Prime Minister.

Lakhs of voters in Surat have been deprived of the right to exercise their franchise. While one hopes that the developments that have taken place in Surat and Indore are not replicated, the right of the people to exercise their franchise must not be trampled upon.

__________

Also Read:

Dr. Manmohan Singh: A Hero Shy of His Own Greatness

‘Yahi Hai Mera Mama’ – A commentary on Lok Sabha Elections

AAP under scrutiny; Delving into poetic justice

Hai, Modi kitna bura hai! (Agreed. But…)

Relax, My dead body won’t trouble your shoulders!

Shilanyas was a mistake, but Rajiv was not aware of unlocking Babri

ਉੱਲੂ ਨੇਤਾ ਅਤੇ ਭੇਡਮਈ ਵੋਟ

रामदेव जैसे बाबा लोग इतने मज़े में क्यों हैं?