Mahua Moitra strikes Supreme Courtroom in opposition to 2023 legislation provision on CEC, ECs appointments

TMC MP Mahua Moitra. File
| Picture Credit score: PTI

TMC MP Mahua Moitra has moved the Supreme Courtroom in opposition to the supply of the 2023 legislation over the appointments of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and the Election Commissioners (ECs).

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh on Wednesday (February 19, 2025) deferred the listening to of comparable pleas in opposition to the supply after the Holi break.

Based on the Supreme Courtroom web site, the matter may come up on March 19.

Ms. Moitra, an MP from Krishnanagar Lok Sabha constituency, in her plea filed by way of advocate Talha Abdul Rahman, argued having a direct curiosity within the integrity and equity of the electoral course of in India and the function of the Election Fee of India (ECI), together with the method of appointment of ECs.

“Even in any other case, as a conscientious citizen of India with a stake in the way forward for electoral democracy in India, the applicant seeks to intervene within the current proceedings wherein constitutional validity of, inter alia, Part 7 of the Chief Election Commissioner and different Election Commissioners (Appointment, Situations of Service, and Time period of Workplace) Act, 2023 (Impugned Act) has been challenged,” mentioned her plea.

Based on Part 7 of the Act, the choice committee — tasked with making suggestions for appointment of the CEC and different ECs — shall encompass the Prime Minister, because the chairperson, the Chief of the Opposition (or the chief of the biggest Opposition occasion within the Lok Sabha) and a Union Cupboard Minister to be nominated by the Prime Minister.

Ms. Moitra mentioned it was Part 7 of the impugned Act, which described the composition of the choice committee, which was notably “troubling” and was the “fulcrum” of the her constitutional problem.

“A number of Structure bench judgments of this court docket have repeatedly held and reiterated that within the curiosity of free and truthful elections, the EC needs to be truthful, neutral and impartial,” her intervention plea mentioned.

She argued that Part 7 of the impugned Act allowed an “executive-dominated” choice panel to represent the EC by recommending appointment of the CEC and different ECs.

“In doing so, the impugned Act permits the manager to affect the composition of the EC and defeats the now well-established precept of free and truthful elections, which requires an insulated, nonpartisan and fiercely impartial EC to conduct and supervise the election course of,” added the plea.

She mentioned the precept of non-partisan elections wherein all political actors have a good and equal probability of succeeding fashioned probably the most important cornerstone of the Indian structure in addition to our consultant democracy.

The apex court docket’s March 2, 2023 Structure bench verdict mentioned that leaving the appointment of the ECs and CEC within the fingers of the manager could be detrimental to the well being of the nation’s democracy and the holding of free and truthful elections .

It mentioned until a legislation was enacted for appointments of the CEC and ECs, a panel of the Prime Minister, Chief of Opposition and the Chief Justice of India would suggest individuals for appointment.