Discuss the role of the Election Commission of India in the light of the evolution of the Model Code of Conduct.

Early Years and the Genesis of the MCC (1950s-1970s)

Initially, the ECI primarily focused on delimitation of constituencies and preparation of electoral rolls. The seeds of the MCC were sown in the 1950s, arising from informal agreements between the ECI and political parties to prevent misuse of official machinery and maintain order during elections. These early guidelines were largely based on consensus and lacked formal legal backing. The first written version of the MCC emerged in 1960, primarily addressing the use of official vehicles and government resources by ruling parties.

Expansion and Formalization (1980s-1990s)

The 1980s and 1990s witnessed a significant expansion of the MCC, driven by increasing instances of electoral malpractices like booth capturing and the use of money and muscle power. The ECI began to proactively address these issues, adding provisions to the MCC related to rallies, processions, speeches, and the use of media. The 1991 elections were a turning point, with the ECI demonstrating a stronger resolve to enforce the MCC, even against powerful political actors. This period also saw the introduction of measures like the observer system to monitor the electoral process.

Strengthening Enforcement and Addressing New Challenges (2000s-Present)

The 21st century has seen the ECI grapple with new challenges posed by the rise of social media, the increasing role of money power, and the proliferation of fake news. The MCC has been amended several times to address these issues. Key developments include:

• Social Media Guidelines (2017 onwards): The ECI introduced specific guidelines for social media platforms, regulating political advertising and content during elections.
• Expenditure Monitoring: Enhanced monitoring of election expenditure, including the use of shadow observers and stricter enforcement of expenditure limits.
• Criminal Background Checks: Requiring candidates to disclose their criminal history and providing voters with information about candidates with criminal records.
• Use of Technology: Implementation of technologies like Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) to enhance transparency and credibility.

The ECI’s Powers and Limitations

While the MCC is not legally enforceable (unlike in some other democracies), the ECI has significant powers to enforce it. These include:

• Reprimanding Candidates and Parties: Issuing warnings and reprimands for violations of the MCC.
• Suspending Campaigns: Suspending election campaigns in areas where violations are serious.
• Filing FIRs: Directing the police to file First Information Reports (FIRs) against individuals or parties violating the MCC.
• Debarring Candidates: Debarring candidates from contesting future elections in cases of serious violations.

However, the ECI faces limitations. The lack of a specific legal framework for the MCC means that its decisions can be challenged in court. Furthermore, political parties often accuse the ECI of bias, particularly when enforcement actions are taken against them. The ECI’s effectiveness also depends on the cooperation of law enforcement agencies and the willingness of political parties to abide by the rules.

Recent Controversies and Debates

Recent elections have seen debates surrounding the ECI’s handling of issues like the use of exit polls, the timing of election announcements, and allegations of bias in enforcement. These controversies highlight the challenges faced by the ECI in maintaining its neutrality and credibility in a highly polarized political environment. The demand for a legally enforceable MCC continues to gain momentum.