"EC cannot decide who wins or loses": Former Haryana Special Chief Secretary Gulati
Former Haryana Special Chief Secretary Sunil Kumar Gulati defends the Election Commission, stating voters decide outcomes, not the poll body.
Defending the integrity of India's democratic institutions, former Haryana Special Chief Secretary Sunil Kumar Gulati has asserted that the Election Commission of India (ECI) does not possess the power to dictate electoral outcomes. Speaking on the recent controversies surrounding the poll body, Gulati emphasized that winning and losing are natural components of the democratic process and that allegations of misconduct must be supported by concrete evidence rather than mere objections.
Voters, Not Officials, Hold the Power
Addressing the skepticism surrounding election management, Gulati pointed out that India is a mature democracy with a sophisticated electorate. He argued that the idea of the Election Commission manipulating results is a fundamental misunderstanding of the Indian voter.
"Ours is not a nascent democracy; our country has been independent for over 78 years. People are not so foolish that they would cast their vote in a certain direction just because the Election Commission hinted at it. No one is that naive," Gulati stated.
He further clarified that the Commission's role is to facilitate the process, not to determine the victor. "The Election Commission could not simply determine who wins or loses an election," he added, noting that the ultimate decision rests solely with the citizens at the polling booth.
The Logic of Winning and Losing
Gulati highlighted the inconsistency in how political parties react to electoral results. He noted that when parties lose in states like Himachal Pradesh or Karnataka, the same electoral system is rarely called into question. According to him, the system remains consistent regardless of which party emerges victorious.
Regarding the calls for systemic changes or investigations into official appointments, Gulati maintained that established procedures are already in place for the appointment and removal of officials. He suggested that those with legitimate grievances should utilize the judiciary rather than making unsubstantiated claims.
"Those seeking action against election officials could approach the appropriate courts and follow established procedures to prove their allegations," he remarked.
Former Officers Unite to Defend Electoral Integrity
The remarks from Gulati follow a significant move by 124 former officers from the IAS, IFS, and other allied services. In a collective open letter to the citizens of India, these retired officials came to the defense of the Election Commission and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The group expressed concern over allegations of vote rigging, which they claimed lack credible evidence. They argued that the current electoral landscape has evolved significantly from the era of booth capturing and ballot box stuffing, thanks to modern safeguards such as:
- Polling agents present at every station.
- Strict sealing of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).
- High-level security for strong rooms.
- VVPAT verification to ensure transparency.
The Necessity of Voter List Purification
Mahendra Kumar Parekh, a retired IAS officer and signatory of the letter, explained the technical necessity of the Special Intensive Revision process. He clarified that the "purification" of voter lists is a routine and vital administrative task.
“SIR is not a new procedure; the purification of voter lists has been an ongoing process,” Parekh said. He explained that the process is essential to remove the names of deceased voters, update address changes, and eliminate duplicate entries that appear in multiple locations. This task is conducted systematically under the supervision of District Election Officers.
Parekh expressed concern that the current atmosphere of questioning democratic institutions without proof could potentially lead to social anarchy. He noted that a system cannot be deemed "honest" when a party wins and "rigged" when that same party loses, pointing out that the ruling party at the Centre has lost several state elections under the same Commission's watch.