Highlighting the critical role of structural integrity in a functioning democracy, Supreme Court judge Justice BV Nagarathna on Saturday warned that the neutrality of elections cannot be guaranteed if the body tasked with conducting them is dependent on those contesting the polls.
Delivering the Rajendra Prasad Memorial Lecture at Chanakya Law University, Justice Nagarathna emphasized that the Election Commission (EC) is the primary institution responsible for maintaining the sanctity of the ballot. She noted that the control over the electoral process is, in essence, control over the very conditions of political competition.
Drawing upon a 1995 Supreme Court verdict that recognized the EC as a constitutional authority of high significance, Justice Nagarathna raised concerns regarding the “fourth-branch” institutions that exist outside the classical tripartite scheme of the Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary.
“The concern, once again, was structural: if those who conduct elections are dependent on those who contest them, the neutrality of the process cannot be assured,” she stated.
She further observed that power is not merely exercised through formal institutions but through the processes that sustain them, including public finance, regulation, and elections. According to the judge, a constitutional structure must look beyond classical forms to restrain power effectively.
In a poignant reflection on constitutional history, Justice Nagarathna cautioned that the collapse of a democracy often begins with the disabling of its structures rather than a direct violation of rights.
“The dismantling of structure occurs when institutions stop checking each other,” she explained. “At that moment, elections may continue, courts may function, laws may be enacted by Parliament, and yet, power is effectively not restrained because the structural discipline no longer exists.”
She described elections not as mere periodic events, but as the fundamental mechanism through which political authority is constituted and smooth changes in government are facilitated.
Turning her attention to the federal structure of India, Justice Nagarathna urged the Union government to view states as “coordinates and not subordinates.” She asserted that the separation of powers is a constitutional arrangement of co-equals.
The judge also called for a bipartisan approach to governance, stressing that “inter-party differences” should be set aside when dealing with Centre-State relations. She underscored that the quality of governance must remain consistent, regardless of which political parties are in power at the central or state levels.
