Bengal Governor Is Right, State Poll Panel Chief’s Conduct Hasn’t Been Above Board

Bengal Governor C V Ananda Bose’s criticism of state election commissioner (SEC) Rajiva Sinha seems to be justified. 

A number of acts of commission and omission by Sinha ever since he was appointed the SEC on 7 June this year have raised doubts about his impartiality.

Sinha, who served as the state chief secretary for a year from September 2019, is known to be very close to Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee. 

Sinha was appointed chairman of the West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation (WBIDC) immediately after his retirement (see this tweet). 

Sinha was instrumental in frustrating attempts by the Union government to monitor Bengal’s response to the Covid-induced pandemic while he was the chief secretary (read this and this).

Many say he often violated service rules and protocol in order to please Banerjee who had appointed him superseding other senior IAS officers. 

Sinha’s close proximity to Banerjee has laid him open to criticism by opposition parties which are suspicious of his conduct and have called him biased. 

Here’s Why Sinha’s Conduct As SEC Doesn’t Inspire Much Confidence

Immediately after being appointed the SEC, Sinha announced the schedule for panchayat elections in Bengal.

He was appointed the SEC on 7 June, and in less than 24 hours (on 8 June) he announced the poll schedule.

This, say opposition leaders, proved that Sinha did not act independently and simply announced the poll schedule that had been decided in advance by his political masters.

Sinha did not hold the customary discussions with opposition parties before announcing the poll schedule which came as a complete surprise to all opposition parties. Holding such consultations is the norm and integral to fair conduct of polls.

The poll schedule announced by Sinha was loaded against the opposition. 

He allowed only five working days (from 9 to 15 June, with 10 and 11 June being holidays) for filing of nominations.

Sinha also announced single-phase polls (on 8 July) that would make it impossible to ensure adequate security for free and fair elections.

Bengal is notorious for poll violence and that is why elections are always held in multiple phases. This allows security forces to move from one area, where elections are over, to another where elections are due, in order to preserve the sanctity of the poll process and prevent violence and rigging. 

A single-phase poll puts a huge strain on security forces, including the police. 

Sinha initially announced that he would not seek central forces because the state police was adequate to ensure free and fair polls. 

The Calcutta High Court ruled against him and asked him to seek central forces to conduct the polls. Sinha and the state government appealed to the Supreme Court, which dismissed their plea. 

But Sinha then tried to cock a snook at the Calcutta High Court and announced he will requisition only 22 companies of central forces — one of each district of the state — for the polls (read this). 

The court had to intervene again and order Sinha and the state government to requisition at least 822 companies of central forces. 

Despite damning observations by the High Court and the Supreme Court, Sinha remained unfazed and was perceived as acting only perfunctorily to comply with the letter, not the spirit, of court orders and the law. 

True to apprehensions, violence broke out at the very commencement of the nomination process with Trinamool Congress workers and musclemen allegedly trying to intimidate opposition functionaries and supporters, attacking them and preventing them from filing their nomination papers (read this). 

Sinha’s silence on the violence was deafening. He even chose to ignore requests by Governor Bose to meet him at the Raj Bhawan. 

The conduct of state government officials handling the nomination process raised doubts about the integrity of the entire process. 

A huge number of anomalies and even illegal acts were committed. Nomination papers of many opposition candidates were allegedly cancelled arbitrarily to allow Trinamool candidates to win uncontested. 

Even after the scrutiny of nominations was over, opposition candidates found their names missing from the list of contestants. 

Numerous complaints to the SEC by aggrieved candidates failed to evoke any response and Sinha even refused to do justice to those whose nominations had been cancelled arbitrarily. 

Sinha, as Governor Bose pointed out, failed to visit areas affected by violence or send teams of observers to such places to oversee poll preparations and ensure that polling is conducted in a free and fair manner. 

Sinha even refused to meet senior opposition leaders who wanted to discuss their grievances with him.

Petitions and affidavits filed by the SEC and the state government in courts, as well as the arguments of the lawyers representing the two entities, have been strikingly similar.

This has lent credence to the view that the SEC and the state government were working in tandem when the SEC should work independently and in an impartial manner. 

All these factors have led to the belief among not only opposition parties, but also a large section of the people of Bengal, that state election commissioner Rajiva Sinha’s conduct has not been impartial and independent as is required under the law. 

Leader of opposition Suvendu Adhikari put it succinctly: “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion”. 

“Rajiva Sinha’s conduct ought to have been not only impartial, but should have been perceived to be impartial, especially by the opposition parties. Sadly for Bengal, for democracy and integrity of the poll process and for Sinha himself, that has not been the case,” Adhikari told Swarajya.