Editor,
Recently the Centre told the Supreme Court that the Prime Minister’s post has a “sanctity” and his choice of Chief Election Commissioner or Election Commissioners cannot be distrusted and, therefore, the Chief Justice of India’s exclusion from the election panel cannot be faulted.
This argument seems to attach a rider to universally accepted democratic principles of adopting the separation of powers and avoiding conflict of interest. The rider suggests that no conflict will arise regarding the interests of a person holding a sanctified post, one so protected that no democratic principle or practice can touch it. But such a sacred post suits a monarch or a dictator well, but not a Prime Minister in a democracy.
Sujit De,
Kolkata
