Electoral Democracy in Panchayats in India

Two decades ago, Indian constitution provided for elected local self- governance institutions—municipalities in urban areas and panchayats in rural areas. These changes in Indian constitution were made to provide for guaranteed electoral formation of local government institutions, just as their counterparts at provincial and national levels. To conduct these elections, the constitution provided for formation of State Election Commissions (SECs).

Recently, another round of  panchayat elections were held in Punjab, West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh during the month of July. These elections in three different states of India in three different locales have brought to the fore some interesting similarities and differences about panchayat elections.

First, it now appears that guaranteed five yearly electoral term of panchayats is reasonably institutionalized. Unlike in the early years where civil society and media had to pressurize state governments to hold elections on time, there is now an automatic process in place.

Second, citizens take panchayat elections very seriously. Many candidates contest, especially for the post of Sarpanch (head of village panchayat); many women and SC/ST candidates contest out of their own volition. Many citizens vote. Voting percentage in all three recently held panchayat elections was above 80%, much higher than in assembly or parliamentary elections.

Third, almost all elections to panchayats are now being associated with political parties, either directly or indirectly. All political parties have learnt to see the value of grassroots elected leadership, and therefore, the candidates tend to gain affiliations with one party or other.

What is somewhat different and unsettling is continued violence during elections. Despite its good record of empowering panchayats in West Bengal during the past two decades, panchayat elections in that state have always been associated with violence, irrespective of which party has been ruling the state. Violence at minor scale also occurred in Punjab and AP during the recently held panchayat elections.

This is indeed a very unfortunate trend. There is declining scale of violence in assembly and parliamentary elections during the past decade. Why continuing violence that obstructs free and fair elections to panchayats is allowed to be continued?

Another disturbing trend is the uneven and constitutionally unacceptable roles and authority of SECs in different states. West Bengal SEC had to go to High Court to assert its authority in fixing the dates of the panchayat elections. Ultimately, the Supreme Court had to intervene. It clearly shows that many regional parties (like TMC in west Bengal) are still not able to treat SECs as independent constitutional bodies just like the Election Commission of India.

This calls for a national review of the status of SECs, their roles, authority, finances, infrastructure, etc. It is imperative that the process of appointment of SECs is made more transparent and multi-dimensional by including the Chief Justice of High Court, the Leader of the Opposition in the Assembly and a few other such institutional actors so that the Chief Minister alone doesnât do such critical appointments.

Finally, it is important that the citizens continue to be vigilant about panchayat elections. Civil society has to continue to engage with panchayat elections in numerous ways—PEVACs (Viter awareness campaigns), monitoring electoral process, supporting SECs, dialoguing with political parties, etc. In the absence of such vigilance by civil society, political forces may continue to be tempted to obstruct free and fair elections with a view to capture institutions of governance. Electoral democracy requires eternal vigilance by citizens!

Rajesh Tandon   August 12, 2013