Need to look at grey areas, say ex-CJIs on simultaneous poll Bill

Advertisement

Here's a look at what Justice Khehar is learnt to have told the joint panel headed by BJP MP PP Chaudhary:

Justice Khehar is learnt to have focused on the technical aspects of the Bill, pointing out that the ONOE aims to synchronise the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections.

Citing Article 82A (1), he is reportedly said to have noted that this provision only sets the date for constituting a new Lok Sabha and does not interfere with the conduct or duration of elections. On the issue of reduced tenures of state assemblies in cases of early dissolution, he reportedly explained that the Bill ensures voter transparency by mandating the Election Commission to notify the exact term of the House being elected, making the electorate fully aware of the shortened tenure.

He is further reported to have mentioned that Article 83(2) of the Constitution contains the phrase “unless sooner dissolved", which makes it clear that the five-year tenure of legislatures is not sacrosanct. Here is reported to have advocated that a shortened or even extended term would not violate the Constitution’s basic structure.

Khehar is reported to have suggested that the Bill’s language be refined to minimise legal ambiguity and avoid potential judicial misinterpretation.

Justice Chandrachud's main objection was reported to have been in connection with the powers conferred on the Election Commission of India by the proposed Bill. He is said to have referred to the following provisions, namely one which allows the Election Commission to modify provisions of Part XV of the Constitution to implement the Bill.

The other provision, which he is reported to have flagged, empowers the poll panel to postpone elections to any state Assembly if simultaneous conduct with the Lok Sabha is deemed infeasible.

He reportedly said that giving the Election Commission power to alter substantive constitutional provisions or to shorten the tenure of elected assemblies through a unilateral report to the President cannot pass constitutional muster.