3 ex-CJIs support simultaneous polls, but flag issues in Bill

Former Chief Justices of India, who have conveyed their views to a parliamentary committee on the Bill proposing simultaneous polls, have endorsed the constitutionality of the “one nation, one election” concept, but have raised concerns over its various aspects, including the power given to the Election Commission, and offered suggestions.

Former CJI DY Chandrachud, in his opinion submitted to the Joint Committee of Parliament, has dismissed the opposition’s criticism that the synchronisation of the Lok Sabha and state Assembly polls violates the Constitution’s basic structure, saying the Constitution never mandated holding national and state elections separately.

However, he has joined another former CJI Ranjan Gogoi in questioning the “sweeping powers” granted to the Election Commission in the proposed constitutional amendment law “without laying down any guidelines for the exercise of the discretion”, according to the opinion submitted to the parliamentary panel.

Chandrachud and another former CJI JS Kehar are scheduled to appear before the committee headed by BJP MP PP Chaudhary on July 11 so that members can interact with them over the Bill’s provisions and seek their views on their queries.

Questioning the vast powers the Bill seeks to bestow on the EC, Chandrachud said such “unbounded authority” could enable the poll body to curtail or extend the tenure of a state Assembly beyond the constitutionally mandated five years, under the pretext that simultaneous elections with the Lok Sabha are not feasible.

The Constitution must define, delineate and structure the circumstances under which the ECI may invoke this power, he added.

Two former CJIs, UU Lalit and Ranjan Gogoi, had appeared before the committee in February and March, respectively. During the interaction, Gogoi agreed with the concerns of some members over the excessive power given to the EC, sources have said.

Lalit had suggested that simultaneous polls should be rolled out in a staggered manner and not at one go, as he had said that cutting short the remaining terms of assemblies with substantive tenure left for the purpose of synchronising election cycles could be legally challenged.

However, all three ex-CJIs have not questioned the constitutionality of the concept of simultaneous polls.

India