Ballot Box Blues: Is Chandigarh a Case Study in Democratic Vulnerability?

The Chandigarh Mayoral polls took centre stage after the Supreme Court (SC) set aside the poll results and declared the AAP-INC candidate, Kuldeep Kumar, as the winner. The Court had also initiated action against the Returning Officer of the poll, Anil Masih, who admittedly defaced 8 ballot papers during the elections conducted on 30th January 2024 and gravely tampered with the fairness of the electoral process, which is a pivotal element of Indian democracy.

After the polls were conducted, the BJP candidate, Deepak Sonkar, was hastily declared the winner amidst serious chaos which erupted after the Presiding Officer was seen defacing and tampering with the ballot papers. To put things in context, there are 35 wards in Chandigarh in addition to the vote of the ex officio member, i.e., the MP. BJP had 16 votes in its favour (15 Councillors and 1 MP vote) and the AAP-INC alliance had 20 votes in its favour. It was very evident that the AAP-INC-led candidate was likely to win the Mayoral elections given the majority number of votes required in its favour. However, someone has rightly said that it is not over until it is over.

BJP was able to successfully exploit the only loophole present in the entire process and turned the tables eventually. The Presiding Officer of the poll, Anil Masih, was appointed as the nominated Councillor to preside over the proceedings during which the polls were to be carried out. It is to be noted that Anil Masih has been an active member of the BJP, particularly the BJP Chandigarh wing, and was serving as the General Secretary for BJP’s Minority Morcha while he presided over the proceedings. This appointment in itself goes against the very principles of natural justice, ethics, morality and common sense, which cumulatively makes it amply clear that the Presiding Officer being nominated to preside over election proceedings cannot have any linkage or direct leaning with any political party. The elections were doomed from the very beginning.

Furthermore, Anil Masih, most likely working as per instructions delivered to him and not out of his own will, was actively seen defacing and putting an ‘X’ mark on 8 ballot papers, thereby rendering them invalid. This took the AAP-INC candidate’s vote count from 20 to 12, making way for the BJP candidate to emerge victorious with 16 votes. It was categorically this misdemeanour on the part of the Presiding Officer that the Supreme Court took a critical note of.

The unfortunate chain of events for the City Beautiful does not stop here. While the SC was discussing the matter over the past 3-4 days, the BJP’s desperate efforts to stay in power continued. A new plan of action was put in place. Three AAP councillors were brought to BJP just a night before the SC questioned the Presiding Officer on 19th January 2024. Their induction into the BJP was followed by the resignation of Manoj Sonkar, the BJP candidate who was appointed as the Mayor of Chandigarh Municipal Corporation after the polls. The entire plan was based on a miscalculated assumption that the Supreme Court would most likely order a fresh election, and post the induction of three AAP councillors into the BJP, the BJP candidate would win the elections again.

But as the famous Chinese General and Strategist, Sun Tzu, once said “wheels of justice grind slow but grind fine”, BJP’s plans fell through again after the SC ordered the recounting of the ballot papers instead of ordering a fresh re-election. This decision was what led to the appointment of the AAP candidate, Kuldeep Kumar, as the Mayor of the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation.

This decision is indeed relevant and historic too, as the SC once again stepped in to preserve the very fabric of our Indian democracy that lies in the fairness of our elections. The SC has rightfully observed that it does not matter if it is a Parliamentary or an election at the local body level. What matters is upholding democratic values and intent in ensuring utmost fairness in the electoral process on the part of the office-bearers involved, such as the Returning Officer in the instant case.

It is in this context that Chandigarh becomes a useful case study to understand the ongoing political dynamics between the BJP and the I.N.D.I.A. Alliance. The SC decision declaring the AAP candidate as the winner marks the first win of the Alliance against the ruling party ahead of the upcoming Lok Sabha elections. It not only gives some ounce of hope to the Alliance which is itself battling with challenges of its own but also reflects the desperation of the ruling party which is willing to do whatever it takes to stay in power, even at a local body level. On one hand, the BJP claims to win over 370 seats in the upcoming parliamentary elections, and on the other hand, such a trivial and cheap political chain of events involving its leaders reflects the hidden insecurities within the Party. The BJP Chandigarh has been largely clueless and unresponsive about these events, which again showcases the lack of transparency and coordination within the Party to come up with an effective plan that focuses on gaining the trust of the voters rather than indulging in petty & gimmicky politics. This entire episode is not only an eye-opener for the ruling party but also for the voters who are seeing their voices being demolished by their representatives for their own politically charged interests.

The Chandigarh fiasco serves as a stark reminder of democracy's vulnerability. It calls for accountability from political parties and emphasizes the judiciary's crucial role in safeguarding fair elections. The journey to uphold democratic values starts at the base level itself, with each stakeholder having its own set of duties and responsibilities. The local bodies are the institutions which have the onus of directly dealing with the general public. If those institutions fail to reflect the actual voice of the voters, that is indeed a travesty of justice and democracy and needs to be adequately dealt with, just like the SC did in Chandigarh MC’s case.