The Supreme Court revisited the appointment process for election commissioners on Thursday, during which the central government submitted the file related to Arun Goel's appointment as the election commissioner to the constitutional bench. The government shared that copies of the original appointment file were provided to all five judges.
During the hearing, the bench raised questions about the method of appointment. Justice Ajay Rastogi questioned the rapid progression of the file and the swift appointment. He asked how due diligence was completed within 24 hours.
Justice Rastogi inquired about the urgency demonstrated by the government following the vacancy on May 15th. 'Clearance, notification, and acceptance all happened on the same day, without the file even circulating for 24 hours; it traveled at the speed of light,' he remarked. The Attorney General reassured that all concerns raised would be addressed if the court grants the opportunity to speak.
As of now, the constitutional bench has reserved its decision after a marathon hearing. While the court placed the government in the dock with its probing questions, the Attorney General and Solicitor General reminded the court of the boundaries of the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches. Justice KM Joseph led the constitutional bench, joined by Justices Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy, and CT Ravikumar.
The court is set to deliver its verdict on key points, including whether the appointment of the CEC and EC should be made by a collegium involving the PM, the CJI, and the leader of the opposition, if the CEC and EC should have equal protection and a standard removal procedure, whether the ECI should be given powers to draft regulations similar to the Supreme Court and the Houses of Parliament, if all three commissioners should be given equal authority, and if the impeachment procedure should be adopted to remove commissioners when necessary.
The court desires to understand the basis of the appointment, with Justice Rastogi saying, 'Sometimes swift progress is possible, but the question remains why there was such a rush to appoint after the vacancy existed since May 15th. We wish to know if the selection basis is public and transparently accessible.'
The Attorney General, R Venkataramani, stated the Law and Justice Ministry compiles the list of prospective candidates and selects the most suitable, involving the Prime Minister's role.
Justice Joseph emphasized that our constitutional founders intended for the Chief Election Commissioner to have a six-year term, a decision made with foresight. He urged an explanation on how the Law Minister selects these four names from the database, and how the Prime Minister makes the appointment.
If there is a flaw in the appointment process of election commissioners, it is imperative to make improvements. Justice Rastogi compared the current system to the judiciary's, which also underwent changes in its appointment process.
The Supreme Court had requested presentation of the original file related to Arun Goel's selection immediately after starting hearings. The court expressed interest in ensuring no 'hanky-panky' – no foul play – was involved in his appointment.
