Election expenditure reforms and level playing field

Guest Column: The report has called the 2019 general election the “most expensive ever, anywhere”. The ruling parties spend more. While there is a limit on candidates to spend on their campaign, there is no such cap on political parties

“Indian politicians start their legislative careers with a lie — the false spending returns they submit,” former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee once told a parliamentary committee. Lately, the intimidating role of money in the election outcome, quality of law makers and the resultant governance by the political executive have been worrying every thinking citizen.

A poll official inspecting electronic voting machines (EVMs). The ever-increasing electioneering expenditure disincentivises righteous people from participating in the process. It is believed that the expenditure incurred by candidates is manipulated. (Representational photo)

The ever-increasing electioneering expenditure disincentivises righteous people from participating in the process. It is believed that the expenditure incurred by candidates during assembly and parliamentary elections is manipulated and misstated. Nevertheless, such deceptions go unquestioned at individual, institutional and societal levels. The Election Commission of India (ECI) is well aware of the malpractices resorted to by the candidates to manoeuvre such expenditure within the limits set by it.

Skyrocketing electoral expenses

According to a report by the Centre for Media Studies in 2019, the maximum amount, roughly 33% of the total expense, was expended on campaigning and publicity. The second big spending head, about 25%, was distribution of money among voters. This report further stated that the political parties spent ₹60,000 crore in the last Lok Sabha elections. The report has called the 2019 general election the “most expensive election ever, anywhere”. The ruling parties spend more. While there is a limit on candidates to spend on their campaign, there is no such cap on political parties.

Some suggestions are made to bring down this expenditure leading a real level playing field in true democratic spirit.

Amend electoral bonds scheme

The ruling party pockets most of the funds received through electoral bonds. These bonds introduced in 2018 and issued by the State Bank of India are purchased anonymously by donors in favour of an eligible political party (registered under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which have secured not less than 1% of the votes in the last general election to an assembly or Parliament).

According to the latest data with the ECI, of the total bonds worth ₹3,435 crore sold in 2019-20, the ruling party at the Centre received about 74% and the other eligible political parties shared the rest. The existing scheme of electoral bonds creates an uneven playing field for political parties. Its very nature and functioning favour the ruling parties. The scheme lacks transparency, equity, fairness and a level playing field. It distorts the financial equilibrium among political parties. The scheme needs to be amended in a way that these bonds go to a common pool at the national level, and then distributed according to the vote share received by the eligible political parties in the last parliamentary and assembly elections. This will also snap the quid pro quo between the ruling dispensation and the donors, and thus remove the alleged influence by the donors on policy formulation, ensure genuine anonymity and create a level playing field with equitable sharing of political donations.

Many are unaware that the cost of printing the electoral bonds and the bank commission charged by the SBI are borne by the government and not by the buyers. Why should the taxpayer bear these two charges? Let the donors who donate bonds worth crores of rupees, or the recipient bear these costs.

Restrict number of election rallies

Two leaders of the main political parties at the national level addressed more than 140 rallies each in the last Lok Sabha elections across the country. Such mega gatherings cost huge expenditure, become a potential threat to public health and disturb normal public life. There is a need to restrict the number of rallies each party can hold in each constituency and the state to bring down the election expenditure and ensure a level playing field. Access of political leaders to public may be increased through modern means of communication.

A 1998 report of the Indrajit Gupta Committee on State Funding of Elections recommended partial state funding, mainly in kind. In addition to free TV and radio broadcast time on state-owned media, it recommended that private channels make available sufficient free air time to recognised national and other parties during elections. Rules need to be amended so that each TV and radio channel, whether government or private, mandatorily devote pre-determined time for campaigning and election debates to each political party free of cost. The print media be also mandated to publish political advertisements at DAVP rates.

Filing online nominations

A considerable amount is spent on filing nomination papers by organising a caravan of vehicles and making this event a show of strength. Taking advantage of modern technology, amend the rules to file nominations online. The oath can also be taken online with a video clip submitted to the returning officer for record.

Include party expenditure

In 1974, the Supreme Court ruled in the Kanwar Lal Gupta v. Amar Nath Chawla case that the party spending on behalf of a candidate should be included in calculating that candidate’s election expenses to determine whether the election expenditure limit had been violated. In response, Parliament amended the RPA in 1975 to nullify this judgment. Existing expenditure limits become meaningless if expenses incurred by a political party are not proportionately added to the expenditure of its each candidate. This amendment needs to be reversed. All political parties must come together to make the largest democracy on this planet the best democracy. sksandhu521@gmail.com

SK Sandhu (HT file photo)

The writer is a retired Punjab IAS officer. Views expressed are personal