Ahead Of Election Season, A Call To Eliminate Duel Constituency Contesting

The provisions within the Representation of the People Act of 1951 permitting an individual to run for election in two constituencies simultaneously have consistently attracted criticism since their inception. Prior committees on legal reforms and experts in the fields of law and public affairs have highlighted that this practice imposes an unnecessary by-election on constituents, leading to wasteful expenditure of taxpayers' funds and time. Currently, a writ petition is under the consideration of the Supreme Court, seeking the repeal of these provisions and the prohibition of an individual contesting in more than one constituency concurrently. The Court has issued a notice to the Government, and a scheduled hearing is set to commence in December.

Under the existing regulations, an individual is permitted to contest elections in two constituencies but is required to vacate one of the seats in the event of winning both, leading to an unwarranted by-election and associated expenses. The petition, filed by Koshy Jacob, a lawyer at the Supreme Court, challenges the constitutional validity of sections 33 and 70 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Section 33 of the Representation of the People Act 1951 provides that a person can contest a general election or a group of by-elections or biennial elections from a maximum of two constituencies. Section 70 of the Act stipulates that if a person is elected to more than one seat in either the House of the Parliament or in the Legislative Assembly, he or she can hold on to one of the seats that she managed to win. 

The rising expense of general elections

The actual cost of running elections is much higher than what political parties officially report to the Election Commission of India. A cursory look at the numbers from the past six decades gives the picture of the significant increase in election expenses.

For instance, in 1967, the total expenses for a general election were only 10.79 Crore rupees. This amount increased to 11.6 crore in 1971, 23.03 crore in 1977, 54.77 crore in 1980, 81.51 crore in 1984, and 154.22 crore in 1989. The government's election expenses surged to 359 Crore in 1991, 880 Crore in 1999, and 1300 Crore in 2004. The petitioner argues that the public funds spent on the 2009 general election saw a massive increase to a staggering 10,000 crore rupees.

Over the course of 14 years since 2009, the data provided by the Election Commission illustrates how the general elections in India have evolved into a multi-million-dollar affair. Holding power for two consecutive terms has significantly bolstered the BJP's financial capacity for funding election campaigns. In the 2019 elections, the BJP alone expended a substantial 1,264 Crore rupees, while the Congress party's expenditure amounted to 820 Crore rupees, according to the ECI. 

To provide a recent example, during the State Assembly elections in Nagaland, Meghalaya, and Tripura, the Congress party spent 25 Crore rupees, whereas the BJP allocated a hefty 28.5 Crore rupees for just one state, namely, Tripura.

According to the Election Commission of India (ECI), in the 2022 Gujarat Legislative Assembly Election, the BJP's expenditure was reported at 210 crore rupees, while the Congress party's spending amounted to 130 Crore rupees. It is noteworthy that the BJP invested more funds in the 2014 general election compared to the Congress, despite being in power. The declared expenditure by Congress in 2014 was 516 crore rupees, while the BJP's campaign spending reached 714 crore rupees.

‘The necessary expenditure for the general election cannot be curtailed, but by-elections forcing upon people by one person contesting into two seats should be eliminated’ Advocate Koshy Jacob, the petitioner told Outlook.

The recommendations by experts

In 2004, the Election Commission proposed to do away with the practice of candidates contesting from two constituencies at a time. The draft proposal for electoral reforms submitted by the then Chief Election Commissioner T S Krishna Murthy states, 
The Commission is of the view that the law should be amended to provide that a person cannot contest from more than one constituency at a time. If the Legislature is of the view that this provision should be retained, then there should be an express provision in the law requiring a person who contests and wins from two seats, resulting in a by-election for one of the constituencies, to deposit with the Government an appropriate amount of money as expenditure for holding the by-election."

In 2010, the Core Committee for Electoral Reforms under the Ministry of Law and Justice also made similar recommendations. This Committee also recommend the government ban a person contesting from more than one constituency at a time or contesting to one House by quitting the position held in the other. It is also recommended that if the provision lets a person contest from more than one seat, he or she should be liable to carry out the expenses incurred in the by-election.

According to the petitioner, the politicians are using these provisions in the Representation of People Act only to maximise their bargaining capacity or to enhance their career prospects. "People should not be forced to pay for the caprice or political insurance or greed of the politicians," argues the petitioner.