ELECTION COMMISSION DECIDES TO KEEP DISSENT UNDER WRAPS VIJAYALAKSHMI RAJU Legal Article Thu, May 23, 2019, at ,03:22 PM Days after simmering tension within the poll body over the issue came out in the open, the Election Commission rejected with a majority vote election commissioner Ashok Lavasa demand that dissent notes should be recorded in its orders on model code violations. The commission comprising Chief Election Commissioner Sunil Arora and two other members - Lavasa and Sushil Chandra - deliberated on the contentious issue, after which the poll panel said that dissent notes and minority views would remain part of records but would not be part of its order. “In the meeting of the Election Commission held regarding the issue of MCC (Model Code of Conduct), it was, inter alia, decided that proceedings of the commission’s meetings would be drawn, including the views of all the commission members,” the EC said in a statement. “Thereafter, formal instructions to this effect would be issued in consonance with extant laws/rules, etc.” Explaining the order, an EC official said the dissent notes and minority views would remain part of the poll panel’s records. In the meeting on May 21, Lavasa stuck to his ground, pressing for his demand to include dissenting views in the orders. “My view is very clear that transparency is important. Minority view should be included and there should be time-bound procedures,” he said. HOW DID LAVASA EXPRESS HIS DISSENT? Lavasa had dissented in as many as 11 EC decisions involving complaints against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and BJP president Amit Shah for alleged MCC violations and where they were given a clean chit. As his demand to record his dissent notes in the EC’s orders was not met, Lavasa recused himself from cases relating to relating to MCC violations. In a strongly-worded letter to Arora on May 4, Lavasa is learnt to have said that he is being forced to stay away from the meetings of the full commission since minority decisions are not being recorded. Since copies of the orders are sent to the complainant and respondents, they become public even if the EC does not share it with the media. In his letter, Lavasa is learnt to have also said that his participation in EC meetings is “meaningless” as his dissent remained unrecorded. He had said that his notes on the need for transparency have not been responded to because of which he has decided to stay away from meetings on MCC-related complaints. WHAT WAS THE ELECTION COMMISSION RESPONSE? The EC had maintained that the dissent notes cannot be made part of the order as the poll code violation cases are not quasi judicial in nature and they are not signed by the chief election commissioner and fellow commissioners. “They are like executive orders. They are summary decisions where decision is taken by the EC without hearing out counsels of the two parties. The orders are brief which are not signed by the three commissioners,” explained an official. Such orders are usually signed by the concerned principal secretary or secretary of the EC, the official said. The EC is likely to come out with a circular clearly outlining the procedure relating to complaints of poll code violation. “Status quo will be maintained. Dissent will not be made public, but would form part of EC records,” explained an official. As per the law governing the functioning of the EC, efforts should be to have unanimity, but in cases of dissent a majority (2:1) view prevails.