There is an unending debate all over the world about which is the best form of governance. Arguments abound in favor of communism, dictatorship, military rule, feudalism, and democracy. Yet, among thought leaders, there seems to be a consensus that democracy is the most suitable form of governance, particularly because it satisfies the human spirit’s craving for freedom of thought and action. At the same time, it is recognized that freedom cannot be absolute, and liberty must be understood as a social contract requiring adjustment of individual interests.
The ideal democratic governance rests on five pillars: legislature, executive, judiciary, election commission, and media. In practice, however, weak links in these pillars can weaken the system and pave the way for chaotic democracy, characterized by noisy debates and clashing viewpoints. Experiments with democratic governance continue worldwide, and the debate on its pros and cons is far from over.
In India, despite socio-economic challenges such as high population density, religious and linguistic diversity, and unequal distribution of income and opportunities, democracy has survived for over 75 years since independence. It has withstood the test of time, proving skeptics wrong and forcing them into virtual silence.
A striking feature of Indian democracy is the electoral process. National elections are held at predetermined intervals, and power changes smoothly according to the people’s verdict. Much of the credit for India’s robust democracy goes to the Election Commission of India, arguably the strongest pillar of our democratic system.
The Election Commission has continuously refined the electoral process and can now be said to conduct elections fairly. While some imperfections remain, they are not overwhelming when viewed holistically. To further strengthen the system, the Commission has introduced 17 reform measures starting with the Bihar elections. These include reducing the average number of eligible voters per polling station to 819, mandatory counting of postal ballots before the last two rounds of elections, mandatory EVM and VVPAT use, mobile phone deposit facilities at polling stations, and a one-stop digital platform called ECINet.
In recent months, the Election Commission rightly emphasized periodic revision of voters’ lists under the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) scheme. This ensures that only genuine Indian citizens vote and prevents malpractice. Given India’s growing population, high death rates, internal migration, and illegal migration from neighboring countries, periodic revision is essential to preserve the sanctity of elections. By initiating SIR in Bihar, the Election Commission fulfills its national responsibility and meets the public’s expectation for elections that truly reflect the people’s mandate. The Commission has also promised to conduct SIR in all states before the next elections.
Unfortunately, when SIR began in Bihar, some political parties and activists opposed it, calling it “vote chori” (vote theft) and accusing the Election Commissioners of dishonesty and partisanship without proof. Despite their uncharitable campaign, the Election Commission responded with dignity and requested complaints be submitted in writing. The critics’ appeal to the Supreme Court was rejected, with the Court expressing full confidence in the Commission’s ability to discharge its duties.
It is difficult to understand how anyone with a true democratic spirit could question the need for periodic revision of voters’ lists. While legitimate concerns can be raised in proper forums, undermining the integrity of the Election Commission is unacceptable and threatens this vital pillar of Indian democracy.
As a constitutional body, the Election Commission must operate with patience, perseverance, and a clear sense of responsibility. In India’s noisy democracy, vested interests, sensationalist media, and political and religious pressures often generate baseless criticism. Yet, the silent majority of citizens can distinguish truth from falsehood and recognize the Commission’s integrity.
With confidence in the judgment of the Indian people, the Election Commission should continue its work with courage and conviction. As many say, “Bravo, Election Commission of India.”
