IMPEACHING THE ELECTION UMPIRE: INDIA'S REPUBLIC-ERA STORY

India's election umpire faces an unprecedented impeachment push, exposing the Constitution's high removal bar and the autonomy-versus-accountability tension in the world's largest democracy.

- TDG NETWORK

Two days ago India's Opposition (the I.N.D.I.A. bloc) announced plans to table an impeachment motion against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, accusing him of bias after he demanded Rahul Gandhi retract allegations of election "vote theft" with a sworn affidavit. At a press conference, Kumar dismissed Rahul's claim as "an insult" to the Constitution and insisted Gandhi must either "submit a signed affidavit or apologise" for his charges. The Opposition has condemned the CEC's remarks as "ludicrous" and out of character for an impartial election authority. Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi warned colleagues that "our democracy is alive solely because of [the right to vote] - [and] the Election Commission is the protector of this right," implying that Kumar's conduct threatened public faith.

Parliamentary removal of a CEC is extremely difficult. By constitutional design, the CEC can only be removed by impeachment on grounds of "proved misbehaviour or incapacity" via a special motion in Parliament. That motion must be supported by at least 50 members in the Rajya Sabha or 100 in the Lok Sabha and then passed by a two-thirds majority of those present and voting in both Houses. In practice, this supermajority has never been secured - President Pratibha Patil famously rebuffed CEC N. Gopalaswami's 2009 recommendation to oust Election Commissioner Navin Chawla, noting that the CEC's advice was not binding. As one former CEC, T.S. Krishnamurthy, wryly observed, "If there is a constitutional provision, let the opposition employ it," but without the ruling party's support an impeachment motion "would lack numbers". In short, the I.N.D.I.A. bloc's threat - even if formally tabled - faces long odds under India's entrenched protections for the Election Commission.

CONSTITUTIONAL ORIGINS AND FOUNDING ELECTIONS