EDITORIAL: MODI/BJP LOST THEIR PARLIAMENTARY MAJORITY: DID THEY LOSE THE ELECTION TOO? AND ARE THEY IN POWER COURTESY OF ECI?
Vinod Mubayi
Before the election results were declared on June 4, 2024, Modi and his cohorts had frequently bragged of winning 400+ seats, an overwhelming majority that would have permitted them to make any constitutional change they wished. Even with a simple majority of 300+ in the last Parliament, they had been able to do enough mischief such as abolish the statehood of Jammu & Kashmir, abrogate Article 370 of the Constitution, weaponize all the agencies of government to become foot soldiers of the ruling party, expel opposition members from the Lok Sabha at the whim of the government, and intimidate or suborn many members of the judiciary at all levels into supinely supporting the measures of the regime. Perhaps the most insidious related to the process of appointing members of the Election Commission of India (ECI), the independent constitutional body charged with conducting elections all over the country. The Supreme Court of India had recommended a three-person panel consisting of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India (CJI), to select the members of the ECI. The Modi regime rubbished this idea and got its parliamentary majority to pass a law removing the CJI from the ECI selection panel and substituting a government minister instead, thereby giving the regime an automatic majority in the ECI member selection.
A few days before the 2024 elections were formally announced on March 16, 2024, one Election Commissioner (EC) resigned under circumstances that were never explained. Two former bureaucrats who had closely worked with BJP leaders, either at the central or state level, were hurriedly appointed as ECs by the selection panel and they conveniently joined the ECI on March 15, one day before the elections were announced to be held in seven phases from April 19 to June 1. The seven phase election itself was unprecedented; while the size and diversity of India’s electorate and geography make it difficult to conclude the election on just one day several former national elections needed no more than three phases. It was widely alleged that the election set up was to suit the convenience of BJP’s prime campaigner, Modi, to ensure that he could deliver campaign speeches in the maximum number of constituencies. The record-breaking heat in the month of May in many parts of India likely depressed election turnout but this did not matter to the ECI that consistently continued to function as B-team of the ruling party.
Once the elections were called, the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) came into force that provides for penalties on politicians on the campaign trail for gross abuse of its provisions such as making communally divisive speeches. Modi made the most egregious and atrocious remarks against the Muslim minority in a number of election speeches but despite being called on to sanction and penalize the Prime Minister for his violation of the MCC, the ECI conveniently chose to ignore these pleas. While Modi’s conduct was the most egregious given the high constitutional office he enjoys, similar divisive rhetoric, banned by the MCC, was also indulged in by other highly placed politicians of the BJP that the ECI also continued to ignore.
The final result of the elections declared by ECI is that the BJP won 240 seats and the BJP/NDA alliance 293 seats, the opposition INDIA alliance 234, and others 16 out of a total of 543 seats (272 needed for majority). But the most shocking revelation that has recently been brought out in a report by a professional group is possible voting manipulation and even possible rigging during the election process that resulted in an estimated minimum of 79 seats in 15 states being won by the ruling BJP/NDA combine. If this had not occurred, there would likely have been no Modi 3.0 term.
This revelation has been made in a report issued by the independent, professional group Vote for Democracy, Maharashtra (VFD) who closely monitored the entire election from the day it was declared to the final counting of votes on June 4, 2024 under the guidance of experts M.G. Devashayam, and Dr Pyara Lal Garg. These experts along with Prof. Harish Karnick have authored a VFD report entitled “Conduct of Lok Sabha Elections 2024: Analysis of ‘Vote Manipulation’ and ‘Misconduct during Voting and Counting’ that makes very serious charges on the way that votes were actually recorded and counted under the purview of the ECI, charges that the ECI, a supposedly independent constitutional body, has completely failed to answer.
As a “vigilant stakeholder in electoral democracy”, VFD observed “the whole election process proactively and in chronological manner” from the enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct (March 16, 2024) until the declaration of results (June 4, 2024) and posting of the data in the public domain on June 6, 2024. The VFD report explains that the objective of “the exercise is essentially to determine whether Votes were ‘recorded as cast’ and ‘counted as recorded’.” Based on its detailed and close overview of the whole election process, VFD concludes that the “Lok Sabha 2024 was conducted against the idea of a free and fair election, with the ECI remaining a spectator most of the time or even a collaborator on certain occasions. This is crystal clear from its own conduct throughout. The poll body has evidently conducted the Lok Sabha election 2024 in a biased and partial manner to favor the ruling dispensation. From polling to counting, the provisions of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951, the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, the relevant laws and instructions were blatantly violated by the political parties and ignored by the Election Commission of India (ECI).”
A very serious charge made in the report is one of “unlawful conduct by the Returning Officers and Observers in some of the Parliamentary Constituencies (PCs). In the said PCs, the role of the Returning Officer was –in several cases–found questionable and deliberate misconduct was alleged to benefit the ruling party at the center.” This possible misconduct on the part of the election officers arises from the large increase in absolute numbers of votes cumulatively for all phases of the election between the voter turnout figures reported at the close of polling varying between 7 pm to 8.45 pm and the final turnout figures supplied by ECI. This increase amounts to over 46.5 million votes and, in percentage terms, it amounts to an average increase of 3.2% to 6.32% across the seven phases of the election. The report remarks “Since, historically, in previous elections voting percentage figures have changed by a minute approximate 1% only, this unexplained hike across all and in some states/phases is unacceptable. Especially since the ECI has, so far, not been forthcoming with any credible reasons for the hike.”
Painstaking, detailed calculations made by Dr Garg are provided in tables in the report for various states that consist of the following columns: name of the state, vote percentile increase, total original votes, total votes hiked, constituency wise increase in votes, number of constituencies where BJP/NDA winning margin is less than the constituency wise increase in votes, and names of constituencies and winning margin of BJP/NDA candidates. Based on these calculations, the report estimates that these possibly manipulated vote figures ensured that “18 more seats were arguably won by the ruling NDA (BJP) in Odisha, eleven in Maharashtra, 10 in West Bengal, 7 in Andhra Pradesh, 6 in Karnataka, 5 each in Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan, three each in in Bihar, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh and Telangana, 2 in Assam and 1 each in Arunachal Pradesh, Gujarat and Kerala.” In other words, a minimum of 79 seats in 15 states could have gone to the BJP/NDA through this hike of votes from the original figures reported to the final figures reported by ECI of Votes Recovered and Counted. As the VFD report asks: “This begs the question of Lok Sabha Elections 2024: Has it been Free & Fair?”
The VFD report explains at length how the state-wise and constituency-wise calculations done by experts arrive at the figure of approximately 79 seats that were allocated to the ruling alliance and thus played a decisive role in the outcome. The conclusion of the report is that there is a “gross mismatch” between the figures of Votes Polled and made available immediately after polling and those that were reported several days later and used in the final count. This mismatch was “coupled with the failure of the ECI to abide by its legal obligations and provide 17-C forms to all candidates that are the ultimate arbiter/ proof of Votes Polled.” The report outlines three possibilities that underlie the mismatch: a) Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) have been tampered with; or b) EVMs have themselves been changed/replaced; or c) Functioning of EVMs is grossly defective.
As the report notes, these questions demand a reasoned response from the ECI, which, so far, has simply ignored the anomalies.
Top - Home