New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice to the Central government and the Election Commission of India (ECI) on a petition filed by Congress leader Jairam Ramesh, challenging recent amendments to the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961.
The amendments allegedly curtail citizens’ rights to access election-related records, raising concerns about transparency in the electoral process.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar sought responses from the Central government and ECI.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Ramesh, criticized the amendments, questioning the rationale behind them.
“One of the reasons given in the press is that CCTV and video recordings are being removed because they reveal the identity of voters,” Singhvi argued, emphasizing that such changes compromise the transparency of the electoral process.
Singhvi urged the Court to set a timeline for the respondents to file their replies, warning against delays that could hinder timely adjudication of the matter. “Otherwise, on the next hearing date, they will say the reply still needs to be filed,” he submitted.
The Central government recently amended Rule 93 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, restricting public access to certain electronic election documents. This includes CCTV footage, webcast recordings, and video documentation of candidates during elections. The amendments were reportedly made to prevent misuse of such records, as per the Union Law Ministry, following recommendations by the ECI.
The amendments have sparked controversy, especially since they came shortly after the Punjab and Haryana High Court directed the ECI to provide CCTV footage, videography, and other documents related to the Haryana assembly elections to an advocate.
In his petition, Jairam Ramesh alleged that the amendments undermine the fundamental principles of free and fair elections. He argued that the ECI, being a Constitutional body, cannot unilaterally suggest amendments to critical election laws without public consultation.
The petition claims that the changes deny public access to essential information, thereby reducing transparency and accountability in the electoral process. Ramesh contended that such moves erode the credibility of the electoral machinery and violate the right of citizens to scrutinize election-related records.
The bench noted the significance of the matter and issued a notice to the Central government and ECI, directing them to file their responses. The case is likely to have significant implications for the conduct of elections and the transparency of the process.
The matter has been scheduled for further hearing.
