logo
How Constitution shields Chief Election Commissioner from arbitrary removal

How Constitution shields Chief Election Commissioner from arbitrary removal

India Today2 days ago
Amid growing friction between the Congress-led Opposition and the Election Commission of India (ECI), India Today has learnt that the Opposition is considering initiating a formal notice of removal against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. This unprecedented move follows allegations by Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi and others, accusing the Election Commission of India of large-scale 'vote theft' and procedural irregularities, especially during the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar and the conduct of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections.advertisementThis development raises questions about the removal process of a Chief Election Commissioner and the legal framework that governs it.The office of the Chief Election Commissioner is a high constitutional post, entrusted with the responsibility of ensuring free and fair elections in the country. Given its importance, the Constitution of India provides a strong safeguard for the independence and autonomy of this office, laying down a removal process that is as stringent as that for a judge of the Supreme Court.CONSTITUTION ON OUSTING OF CEC
The primary provision governing the removal of the Chief Election Commissioner is articulated in Article 324(5) of the Constitution of India. Article 324(5) of the Constitution states, in relevant part — "...the Chief Election Commissioner shall not be removed from his office except in like manner and on the like grounds as a Judge of the Supreme Court..."To understand the process, one must examine Article 124(4) of the Constitution, which outlines how a Supreme Court judge may be removed. According to this provision, a judge can be removed only by an order of the President, following an address passed by each House of Parliament. The address must be supported by both an absolute majority of the total membership of the House and a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting. Removal is permitted only on grounds of 'proved misbehaviour or incapacity.'The term 'proved' is crucial, as it implies that a formal enquiry must precede any parliamentary action. A similar process applies to the Chief Election Commissioner.The investigation and enquiry mechanism is governed by the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. Article 124(4) of the Constitution says "A Judge of the Supreme Court shall not be removed from his office except by an order of the President passed after an address by each House of Parliament supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting has been presented to the President in the same session for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity."advertisementAlthough the Constitution does not define 'misbehaviour,' it is generally understood to include wilful misconduct, corruption, moral turpitude, abuse of office, or repeated dereliction of duty. Misbehaviour must be deliberate and sustained, not accidental or isolated. Cumulative acts that reflect a pattern may also qualify.'Incapacity,' on the other hand, refers to physical or mental conditions that render an official unfit to discharge their duties.To begin the removal process, a motion must first be introduced in either House of Parliament. It requires signatures from at least 100 members of the Lok Sabha or 50 members of the Rajya Sabha, depending on the House in which it is introduced.Once submitted, the Speaker (in the Lok Sabha) or the Chairman (in the Rajya Sabha) decides whether to admit the motion. Admission does not imply guilt, but is necessary to initiate further proceedings. If admitted, a three-member enquiry committee is constituted. This committee must include a sitting judge of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of a High Court, and a distinguished jurist.The committee investigates the charges, frames specific allegations, and gives the CEC an opportunity to respond. Once the enquiry is completed, the committee submits its findings to the presiding officer of the House where the motion was introduced.advertisementIf the committee finds no evidence of misbehaviour or incapacity, the process ends and the motion is dropped. If the findings support the charges, the motion is presented to both Houses of Parliament along with the report.Both Houses must then debate and pass the motion with the required special majority. If the motion passes in both Houses during the same session, an address is sent to the President of India, who is constitutionally bound to remove the Chief Election Commissioner.It is important to note that this removal mechanism is separate from other ways in which the CEC may vacate office. As per Section 4 of the Election Commission (Conditions of Service of Election Commissioners and Transaction of Business) Act, 1991, the term of office for a CEC is six years or until the age of sixty-five, whichever is earlier. The CEC may also resign voluntarily by submitting a written resignation to the President.- Ends
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Resignation rumours swirl, Goa environment minister Aleixo Sequeira says: ‘Some truth… toying with the idea'
Resignation rumours swirl, Goa environment minister Aleixo Sequeira says: ‘Some truth… toying with the idea'

Indian Express

time2 minutes ago

  • Indian Express

Resignation rumours swirl, Goa environment minister Aleixo Sequeira says: ‘Some truth… toying with the idea'

Amid rumours that he is set to resign from the Goa cabinet, Environment Minister Aleixo Sequeira on Wednesday acknowledged there was 'some truth' to the reports which suggested that he will tender his resignation due to 'personal reasons'. Sequeira, who is also holding Law and Judiciary, Legislative Affairs and Captain of Ports portfolios, told the media, 'There is some truth, but I am yet to submit the resignation. I am toying with the idea, but I am yet to take a final decision.' On the reasons for his resignation, if and when it happens, he said, 'Basically personal reasons.' Party sources said Sequeira could submit his resignation to the Goa Chief Minister Pramod Sawant later on Wednesday. In case of his exit, two cabinet berths will fall vacant, paving the way for a cabinet reshuffle in the coastal state. In June, former Art and Culture Minister Govind Gaude was dropped from the cabinet after he levelled corruption allegations in the department of Tribal Welfare, a portfolio held by Sawant. If he steps down, Sequeira is likely to be replaced in the cabinet by the former chief minister and Margao MLA Digambar Kamat. Sequeira and Kamat were among the group of eight turncoat MLAs who switched over to the BJP in September 2022. Sources said the Speaker of the Goa legislative assembly, Ramesh Tawadkar, is also expected to be inducted in the cabinet. Tawadkar, a senior tribal leader, is likely to resign from the Speaker's post on Thursday, according to party sources. Sawant, who is in Delhi for a meeting of the group of state ministers (GoM) on GST-related issues, is expected to return to the state late on Wednesday or Thursday. Speculations about a cabinet rejig in the state have been rife for several months. Last week, BJP state president Damodar 'Damu' Naik hinted at the possibility, saying the reshuffle could take place before the Ganesh Chaturthi festival. This would be the second reshuffle in the Sawant-led government since the BJP retained power and formed the government in the 2022 assembly elections. Former Congress veteran Sequeira, who represents Catholic-dominated Nuvem constituency, was inducted into the cabinet in November 2023, a decision explained by the party as fulfilment of a 'promise' and a 'commitment' made when he joined the party. Sequeira has been in and out of the hospital in the past few months. He has also faced flak from the BJP for the party's dismal performance in Salcete – the district's most populous taluka, which has a majority Christian population – in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. The party polled fewer votes than the Congress in seven out of eight assembly segments in Salcete and lost the South Goa constituency by 13,535 votes. On the sidelines of a party meeting of the core committee and legislators in January, the former BJP state president and Rajya Sabha MP Sadanand Shet Tanavade seemed to rebuke Sequeira, claiming he 'must introspect' whether he 'fit' into the party's system and must ponder whether he wanted to contest the 2027 assembly election on a BJP ticket. Tanavade later played down his remarks, saying he was responding to a question on the party failing to achieve 50 per cent enrolment in some constituencies in a membership drive.

Centre introduces bills for removal of PM, CMs and ministers held on serious criminal charges
Centre introduces bills for removal of PM, CMs and ministers held on serious criminal charges

Scroll.in

time3 minutes ago

  • Scroll.in

Centre introduces bills for removal of PM, CMs and ministers held on serious criminal charges

Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Wednesday introduced three bills in the Lok Sabha that propose the automatic removal of the prime minister, chief ministers and ministers who are 'arrested and detained in custody on account of serious criminal charges'. The three bills are the Constitution 130th Amendment Bill, the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Amendment Bill and the Government of Union Territories Amendment Bill. The bills allow for the removal of the prime minister, and chief ministers and ministers of Union Territories or states arrested for 30 consecutive days on the charges of committing an offence punishable with imprisonment for five years or more, The Hindu reported. The removal would come into effect from the 31st day of their arrest and detention, as per the bills. The arrested minister could be reinstated once they are released from custody. Shah said that he will request the bills to be sent to a joint parliamentary committee for scrutiny. The committee has MPs from all parties. On Tuesday, Shah had indicated to the Lok Sabha Secretariat that the bills would be passed in the ongoing Monsoon Session of Parliament, The Hindu reported. The statement of objects and reasons of the Constitution 130th Amendment Bill submitted by Shah was circulated among Lok Sabha MPs on Tuesday, the newspaper reported. It said that elected representatives represent hopes and aspirations of the residents, adding that it is expected that they rise above political interests and act only in public interest. 'It is expected that the character and conduct of ministers holding the office should be beyond any ray of suspicion,' The Hindu quoted the statement of objects and reasons as saying. A minister facing allegations of serious criminal offences, who has been arrested, 'may thwart or hinder the canons of constitutional morality and principles of good governance and eventually diminish the constitutional trust reposed' by the public in him or her, it added. The statement of objects and reasons said that currently there is no constitutional provision to remove a minister who has been arrested on account of serious criminal charges. Therefore, there is a need to amend Article 75, Article 164 and Article 239AA of the Constitution to provide a legal framework for the removal in such cases. Article 75 of the Constitution outlines the provisions related to the prime minister and the Council of Ministers. Article 164 lists provisions related to the appointment and functioning of the Council of Ministers in a state. Article 239AA relates to the special provisions for the National Capital Territory of Delhi. The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Amendment Bill and the Government of Union Territories Amendment Bill lay out the process of removal of the chief minister and ministers in Jammu and Kashmir, and Puducherry.

‘Know How To Kill Russians': Ukraine Envoy Pokes Moscow, Demands NATO Membership With Chilling Boast
‘Know How To Kill Russians': Ukraine Envoy Pokes Moscow, Demands NATO Membership With Chilling Boast

Time of India

time3 minutes ago

  • Time of India

‘Know How To Kill Russians': Ukraine Envoy Pokes Moscow, Demands NATO Membership With Chilling Boast

'India's Strikes, Not Trump': Tharoor Backs India's Stance On Ceasefire With Pakistan At the launch of the book 'Whither India-Pakistan Relations Today? Can They Ever Be Good Neighbours?', Congress MP Shashi Tharoor praised Operation Sindoor, calling it a decisive response to cross-border terror. He said India's strikes—"not Mr. Trump"—prompted Pakistan to request a ceasefire in May. Tharoor revealed he had written an op-ed days after the Pahalgam attack suggesting such action, and expressed surprise that the government followed the same course. He said India's interception of missiles aimed at Delhi on May 10 showed strength. With Balakot and now Sindoor, Tharoor said India has shown it won't tolerate terror on its soil. 6.7K views | 5 hours ago

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store