Civil Society Role in Electoral Reforms and Transparency
Source:Indian Express ↗
Why It Matters
The article provides a real-world case study of civil society action (ADR) driving institutional change, which is highly relevant for GS2 topics like the Representation of the People Act, civil society's role in a democracy, and transparency in political funding. Understanding the evolution of candidate disclosures and the striking down of electoral bonds is essential for writing robust answers on electoral reforms.
Summary
In a tribute to the late Jagdeep S. Chhokar, lawyer Prashant Bhushan remembers the former IIM Ahmedabad professor as an unwavering champion of electoral transparency and democratic accountability. As a founding member of the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), Chhokar utilized public interest litigation to enact foundational changes in Indian politics. His efforts led to landmark Supreme Court judgments in 2002 and 2003 that mandated candidates to declare their criminal records, financial assets, and educational backgrounds. More recently, Chhokar was instrumental in ADR's successful legal battle to strike down the opaque Electoral Bonds Scheme. The article underscores the indispensable role of civil society and proactive citizens in driving systemic electoral reforms, checking the influence of unaccounted money in politics, and upholding the democratic ideals enshrined in the Constitution.
Key Points
- Jagdeep S. Chhokar, former IIM-A professor, was a founding pillar of the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and a relentless advocate for electoral transparency.
- Through ADR, Chhokar spearheaded historic PILs that resulted in the Supreme Court's 2002 and 2003 rulings, which made it mandatory for electoral candidates to disclose their criminal antecedents, assets, and educational qualifications.
- Chhokar and ADR played a pivotal role in the recent Supreme Court judgment striking down the Electoral Bonds Scheme as unconstitutional, thus promoting transparency in political funding.
- His life's work illustrates the profound impact of civil society organizations (CSOs) in utilizing the judiciary to correct systemic democratic deficits and hold political actors accountable.
Important Terms
Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951
Foundational parliamentary legislation providing the legal framework for conducting elections, including candidate qualifications, disqualifications (Section 8), and political party registration (Section 29A).
UPSC context
GS-II: Salient features of the RPA. Essential for understanding electoral integrity and candidate eligibility.
Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR)
A non-governmental organization founded in 1999 by academics to improve political transparency. It is known for landmark PILs resulting in candidate disclosures and the 2024 striking down of electoral bonds.
UPSC context
GS-II: Role of Civil Society and Pressure Groups in driving electoral and governance reforms.
Electoral Bonds Scheme
A former anonymous political funding mechanism introduced in 2018. It was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2024 for violating the voters' Right to Information under Article 19(1)(a).
UPSC context
GS-II: Transparency & Accountability. Tests knowledge of political funding, judicial review, and fundamental rights.
Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005
A 2005 legislation that operationalizes the fundamental right to know. It empowers citizens to seek information from public authorities, fostering transparency and checking corruption.
UPSC context
GS-II: Important aspects of governance; tests the relationship between citizens' rights and state transparency.
Election Commission of India (ECI)
A permanent constitutional body established under Article 324 to superintend, direct, and control elections to Parliament and State Legislatures, ensuring they are free and fair.
UPSC context
GS-II: Appointment to various Constitutional posts, powers, functions, and responsibilities of the ECI.
Supreme Court of India
The apex judicial body and guardian of the Constitution. In electoral contexts, it uses judicial review to enforce transparency and protect democratic ideals against legislative or executive opacity.
UPSC context
GS-II: Structure and functioning of the Judiciary; focuses on Judicial Review and constitutional interpretation.
Prelims Trap
The voter's Right to Know about candidate backgrounds is a statutory right derived from the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
While the Right to Vote is a statutory/Constitutional right (Article 326/RPA), the Supreme Court ruled the voter's Right to Know is a Fundamental Right under Article 19(1)(a).
Static Concepts Connected
What is the constitutional basis for a voter's right to know?
- Article 19(1)(a): The Supreme Court ruled in 2002 that freedom of speech includes the right to make an informed choice, mandating candidate disclosures.
- PUCL Case (2003): The SC struck down Parliament's Section 33B of RPA which attempted to restrict candidate disclosures strictly to statutory boundaries, reaffirming the fundamental right.
Which key legislative amendments were struck down in the Electoral Bonds case?
- RPA 1951 (Sec 29C): Amendments exempted political parties from reporting electoral bond contributions to the Election Commission of India.
- Companies Act (Sec 182): Amendments removed the cap on corporate donations (previously 7.5% of net profit) and eliminated the requirement to disclose the receiving party's name.
Cross-Topic Patterns
Judicial intervention in electoral reforms
ADR's use of PILs highlights civil society leveraging the judiciary to enforce electoral transparency when the legislature resists (e.g., striking down RPA Section 33B).
Corporate transparency vs anonymous funding
The Electoral Bonds ruling intersects with corporate governance by restoring the Companies Act mandate that firms disclose political beneficiaries and adhere to profit-based donation caps.
Expect a tricky Prelims statement comparing the statutory nature of the Right to Vote with the Fundamental Right to Know (Art 19) in 2026.
Linked PYQs · 5
Linked PYQs · 5
- 2025MainsGS2
Civil Society Organizations are often perceived as being anti-State actors than non-State actors. Do you agree? Justify.
- 2025MainsGS2
Discuss the 'corrupt practices' for the purpose of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Analyze whether the increase in the assets of the legislators and/or their associates, disproportionate to their known sources of income, would constitute 'undue influence' and consequently a corrupt practice.
- 2020MainsGS2
There is a need for simplification of procedure for disqualification of persons found guilty of corrupt practices under the Representation of Peoples Act". Comment.
- 2024MainsGS2
Examine the need for electoral reforms as suggested by various committees with particular reference to "one nation one election" principle.
- 2017PrelimsGS1
Right to vote and to be elected in India is a
