<p class="bodytext">Unopposed election of candidates may emerge as a threat to free and fair elections and democracy in the country if what happened in Surat is a pointer and a precedent. The Lok Sabha constituency in Gujarat was set to see a contest between candidates belonging to the BJP, the Congress, the BSP and some independents. But all of them other than the BJP candidate, Mukesh Dalal, dropped off, leaving the field open for Dalal to be declared the winner without a contest. The reasons for the exit of candidates are not natural and convincing, and that makes the whole situation contrived and dubious. Those who proposed the Congress candidate disowned their signatures on the nomination papers. That story has an unreal ring because the proposers were his own brother-in-law, nephew and business partner, and the candidate is now untraceable. The back-up candidate’s papers were also rejected because one of his proposers said his signature was forged. All other candidates withdrew from the fray, leaving the field clear for the BJP’s Dalal. </p>.<p class="bodytext">Surat has probably seen a manipulation of elections and the use of the election process itself to eliminate contest, which is key to the working of an electoral democracy. Another Congress candidate in Gujarat left the party and joined the BJP. In Arunachal Pradesh, where Assembly elections are also being held, the BJP has won 10 seats unopposed. There are reports that one other Lok Sabha seat may see an election without a contest. These should cause concern because they conform to the BJP’s declared aim of a polity without an Opposition, specifically the Congress. This is elimination of election contests, without which democracy cannot survive. It happens only in authoritarian countries. The people of Surat have also been denied their right to vote. </p>.<p class="bodytext">Doesn’t the confluence of so many unusual circumstances persuade the Election Commission to conduct an investigation into the matter? It is the Election Commission’s responsibility to ensure that voters are not pressured, influenced or coerced to vote for a candidate; it is equally its responsibility to ensure that candidates are not made to withdraw in dubious circumstances. It has to ensure free and fair elections, and it cannot be said that Surat saw a free and fair electoral process. Making some candidates withdraw from contest though coercion or other means amounts to use of unfair means in elections. While two candidates’ papers were invalidated dubiously in Surat, it should be noted that recently the votes for a candidate were rendered invalid by a returning officer in Chandigarh to declare the BJP candidate elected as mayor. The Supreme Court intervened there to undo the subversion of election. Surat has also seen a subversion of democracy through manipulation of electoral procedure. The Election Commission should act. </p>
<p class="bodytext">Unopposed election of candidates may emerge as a threat to free and fair elections and democracy in the country if what happened in Surat is a pointer and a precedent. The Lok Sabha constituency in Gujarat was set to see a contest between candidates belonging to the BJP, the Congress, the BSP and some independents. But all of them other than the BJP candidate, Mukesh Dalal, dropped off, leaving the field open for Dalal to be declared the winner without a contest. The reasons for the exit of candidates are not natural and convincing, and that makes the whole situation contrived and dubious. Those who proposed the Congress candidate disowned their signatures on the nomination papers. That story has an unreal ring because the proposers were his own brother-in-law, nephew and business partner, and the candidate is now untraceable. The back-up candidate’s papers were also rejected because one of his proposers said his signature was forged. All other candidates withdrew from the fray, leaving the field clear for the BJP’s Dalal. </p>.<p class="bodytext">Surat has probably seen a manipulation of elections and the use of the election process itself to eliminate contest, which is key to the working of an electoral democracy. Another Congress candidate in Gujarat left the party and joined the BJP. In Arunachal Pradesh, where Assembly elections are also being held, the BJP has won 10 seats unopposed. There are reports that one other Lok Sabha seat may see an election without a contest. These should cause concern because they conform to the BJP’s declared aim of a polity without an Opposition, specifically the Congress. This is elimination of election contests, without which democracy cannot survive. It happens only in authoritarian countries. The people of Surat have also been denied their right to vote. </p>.<p class="bodytext">Doesn’t the confluence of so many unusual circumstances persuade the Election Commission to conduct an investigation into the matter? It is the Election Commission’s responsibility to ensure that voters are not pressured, influenced or coerced to vote for a candidate; it is equally its responsibility to ensure that candidates are not made to withdraw in dubious circumstances. It has to ensure free and fair elections, and it cannot be said that Surat saw a free and fair electoral process. Making some candidates withdraw from contest though coercion or other means amounts to use of unfair means in elections. While two candidates’ papers were invalidated dubiously in Surat, it should be noted that recently the votes for a candidate were rendered invalid by a returning officer in Chandigarh to declare the BJP candidate elected as mayor. The Supreme Court intervened there to undo the subversion of election. Surat has also seen a subversion of democracy through manipulation of electoral procedure. The Election Commission should act. </p>
