கருத்துக் கணிப்புகளை த் திரித்துவிட முடியும் : தலைமைத் தேர்தல் ஆணையர் குரேஷி பேட்டி, டெக்கன் கிரானிக்கிள்
05 04 2011 இதழில் வெளியாகியுள்ளது. குற்றப் பின்னணியுடையவர்களையே மீண்டும் மீண்டும் அரசியல் கட்சிகள் தேர்தல் களத்தில் நிறுத்துகின்றனவே ? கருத்துக் கணிப்புகளுக்கும், வாயிற்கணிப்புகளுக்கும் ஏன் தடை விதித்தீர்கள் என்பன உள்ளிட்ட கேள்விகளுக்கு குரேஷி அளித்துள்ள பதில்கள் அடங்கிய பதிவு இது. தமிழ்ச் சூழலில் இது போன்ற பதிவுகள் காணக் கிடைப்பதில்லை.
05 04 2011 இதழில் வெளியாகியுள்ளது. குற்றப் பின்னணியுடையவர்களையே மீண்டும் மீண்டும் அரசியல் கட்சிகள் தேர்தல் களத்தில் நிறுத்துகின்றனவே ? கருத்துக் கணிப்புகளுக்கும், வாயிற்கணிப்புகளுக்கும் ஏன் தடை விதித்தீர்கள் என்பன உள்ளிட்ட கேள்விகளுக்கு குரேஷி அளித்துள்ள பதில்கள் அடங்கிய பதிவு இது. தமிழ்ச் சூழலில் இது போன்ற பதிவுகள் காணக் கிடைப்பதில்லை.
‘Opinion polls can be twisted’
Q. For the Assembly polls, the Election Commission (EC) has asked for the mandatory opening of a separate bank account by each candidate for election expenses, and the filing of revised expenditure affidavits. Why?
A. This is part of our initiative to eliminate bad money from elections. The opening of separate bank accounts and paying for all expenditure by cheque will not only leave a money trail, but also provide clues on the amount being used from a candidate’s own funds, the party funds, as well as other sources. We have an enormous responsibility which becomes more urgent because of the growing menace of money power. The most important reform has been to set up a regular machinery for expenditure monitoring.
Q. What will the expenditure monitoring division do?
A. Headed by a senior income-tax official, it will advise the EC on all important policies concerning the curbing of money power in elections. The guidelines we prepared were implemented for the first time in the Bihar polls on an experimental basis last year. They worked extremely well. The feedback from political parties also indicated that these measures were quite successful.
Parties have been asked to not incur any cash expenses. This arrangement helps bring transparency. We feel that the excessive use of money is a competitive phenomenon between political parties and candidates. If one candidate/party uses it, the other feels compelled to do the same and the level-playing field is disturbed. The same goes for criminalisation. If one party puts up a muscleman as a candidate, the others feel intimidated and also field a candidate with a criminal background.
Q. Yet, parties continue to field candidates with a criminal background.
A. One feels embarrassed when various election watch organisations come out with disturbing data on this. There’s embarrassment when it’s pointed out at international fora that of the 543 members in the present Lok Sabha, as many as 162 have a criminal charge pending against them, of which 76 are serious criminal offences. Indeed, the number of members of Parliament with pending criminal charge is going up.
The basic objection of politicians who don’t want criminals banned from contesting is often that parties and candidates file false cases against one another. Two, the law of the land says that unless you’re convicted, you’re innocent. With conviction taking 15 to 20 years, persons with criminal antecedents, and some with heinous crimes against their names, will be lawmakers when actually they have been law breakers. Senior politicians and the Law Commission have said all right, ignore cases that are politically motivated or frivolous. But in the case of a heinous charge that can lead to a conviction of five years or more, if a court has framed charges against them, at least on that basis disqualify them. The EC has added a safety clause saying that such cases should have been filed six months before the poll so that there is time to undo the damage if it’s a false case.
Q. What are the tools the EC will use in the coming Assembly polls to check electoral malpractices like distribution of money, gift, liquor etc by political parties?
A. Everyone knows there is a model code of conduct which needs to be enforced. So, to be accused of enforcing it excessively is an extremely unfair criticism. If there is a law, should we not enforce it honestly? When you use excessive money power, you obviously want quick returns, and that leads to all kinds of questionable actions.
The EC has also appealed to political parties to desist from carrying large amounts of cash in a constituency. Banks have been asked to report any suspicious withdrawal of cash from individual accounts. This will be closely monitored. The Financial Intelligence Unit of the department of revenue has been asked to pass on cash withdrawal reports and suspicious transaction reports and the IT department has been asked to oversee movement of cash in a constituency. Surveillance teams will keep a close watch on the distribution of tokens by political parties which can be encashed later.
Q. Why have you called for a ban on opinion and exit polls?
A. Because they disturb the level-playing field. There is undue influence and confusion created in the minds of voters in a scenario where multi-phased polls are increasingly taking place. Besides, there are reports that such polls get manipulated in favour of or against contending parties. So, in 2009, Parliament enacted a law banning exit polls. The EC wants a ban on opinion polls too and has asked the government to enact legislation for banning them. We feel that an opinion poll too can be manipulated, especially when we’re grappling with the phenomenon of “paid news”.
Q. Will there be a comprehensive framework to tackle criminalisation and corruption of the electoral process?
A. The law ministry and EC are working jointly to evolve a whole set of electoral reforms based on countrywide consultations so that these can be soon made into law by Parliament. I’m hopeful that some major reforms will become a reality soon.
Q. Why are you not in favour of state funding of elections?
A. Because we don’t think this is the answer to the problem we’re dealing with. It does not put a stop to unauthorised expenditure by political parties or candidates. Nobody knows this better than the EC. The money spent in an election is all black money. We fear that if there is state funding, it will only make more money available to political parties for use as black money. The issue is really one of honest enforcement. When such honest enforcement has not happened today, what is the guarantee that after state funding it will all become straightforward? Even the Indrajit Gupta Committee had said that without overall reforms involving the total internal democracy of political parties and transparency in their funding, state funding will actually be counter-productive.
Q. Should a ceiling be imposed on electoral spending by political parties?
A. For financial discipline, we have also been asking political parties to get their accounts audited by auditors appointed by the EC or Comptroller and Auditor General, and to put their annual accounts in the public domain. We have suggested that election expenses of a political party should be subject to a ceiling, and that all political donations should be by cheque, so that the public knows the quid pro quo — that I’ve taken a donation from you and the next day I take a favour from you. Political parties are receiving large donations mostly in cash through the sale of coupons. As they do not have to report donations exceeding `20,000, transparency is affected. The EC is now examining a strict reporting system for cash donations received by political parties and to bring accountability in coupon sales.
source : Deccan Chronicle website
