Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Protector to tormentor through his Capricious act?

Cheif Election Commissioner Mr.Gopalswami recommended the removal of his successor Election Commissioner Navin Chawla. Art 324(5) provides that the election commissioner can be removed by the presidents on the recommendations of the Cheif Election Commissioner. Through its interpretation in Seshan's case the Apex Court has emphasised that the Cheif Election Commissioner's recommendations (for the removal of the Election Commisioner) must be based on cognate and intelligible considerations.
In this case it puzzles me whether the CEC recommendation is based on intelligble and cognate considerations. Many constitutional experts like Mr.Nariman, K.K Venugopal opines that CEC's such capricious act just way before general elections is neither constitutionally valid and fair.. Most significant point which has to be taken into consideration in this present regard is that CEC has Suo motto intiated this process. This kind of arbitrary act would ultimately send a wrong message that the Election Commissioners should function accoding to the whims and caprice of the CEC. An instant fear that a difference of opinion would result in their removal might prevail after this unfortunate situation. Indubitably, this event has set a wrong precedent.
The history of this recommendation, procedural infirmities and the time in which it is made raises a reasonable doubt, Has the protector turned into a tormentor through his capricious act?
Is his act coloured by political motives?

No comments:

Post a Comment