New Delhi: In a significant submission before the Supreme Court, the Government of India has justified its decision to exclude the Chief Justice of India (CJI) from the committee responsible for appointing the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs).
In an affidavit filed before the apex court, the Centre stated that the Constitution does not require judicial representation on the appointment panel and that the inclusion of a judicial member is a matter of legislative policy rather than a constitutional necessity.
Centre’s Key Argument Before the Supreme Court
The government argued that there is no constitutional mandate under Article 324(2) for the Chief Justice of India to be part of the selection committee for Election Commission appointments.
According to the affidavit, judicial participation in the panel is a legislative choice and not a constitutional imperative.
The Centre further contended that the presence of senior government functionaries alongside the Leader of Opposition (LoP) does not automatically imply bias, as constitutional authorities are presumed to act fairly, in good faith, and in the public interest.
Read also: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant Responds Strongly After Fake Caste Comment Spreads Online
Background: Supreme Court’s 2023 Interim Ruling
In 2023, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court introduced an interim arrangement to enhance transparency and independence in appointments to the Election Commission of India.
The court ruled that until Parliament enacted a law, appointments to the Election Commission would be made by a three-member committee comprising:
- The Prime Minister
- The Chief Justice of India
- The Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha
Parliament Enacted New Law Replacing CJI with Cabinet Minister
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, Parliament enacted the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.
Under the new law, the selection committee consists of:
- The Prime Minister
- A Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister
- The Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha
This effectively removed the Chief Justice of India from the appointment process.
Law Under Challenge in Supreme Court
The validity of the 2023 law is currently under challenge before the Supreme Court.
Petitioners have argued that replacing the CJI with a Cabinet Minister undermines the independence of the Election Commission and increases executive influence over appointments.
Centre Says Free and Fair Elections Never Suffered Under Executive Appointments
The Centre rejected these concerns, emphasizing that for more than seven decades, Chief Election Commissioners and Election Commissioners were appointed solely by the executive.
According to the affidavit, there is no evidence to suggest that free and fair elections became casualties under the previous appointment system.
The government described allegations that only a specific panel composition can guarantee independence as “inappropriate, legally unsustainable and premised on a fundamental fallacy.”
Government Calls the New Law More Democratic and Inclusive
The Centre asserted that the 2023 legislation creates a “more democratic, collaborative and inclusive” mechanism for appointments, consistent with the spirit of Article 324(2) of the Constitution.
It also reiterated the established legal principle that a law passed by a competent legislature cannot be challenged merely on allegations of ulterior motive.
Read also: Justice BR Gavai Sworn in As 52nd Chief Justice of India, Becomes First Buddhist to Hold the Post
