The logic of multi-phase elections has increasingly come under question in the last decade. I have been asked this question umpteen number of times and have always defended it, mentioning that the only reason for it is the protection of lives — of voters and the polling staff. People have accepted this reply as reasonable, but not anymore.
It is increasingly clear that the problems arising out of multi-phase elections far outweigh the benefits. The recent seven-phase election was held in 45-50 degrees temperatures, leading to several deaths. The prolonged election was questioned by almost all political parties, the media, not to mention the voters. Even the Chief Election Commissioner, Rajiv Kumar, admitted that the one lesson the Election Commission (EC) learnt from the latest election was that it should have been shorter.
At the time multi-phase elections were introduced, the situation was radically different. The use of muscle power was rampant. Violence, including murders, on polling day or during the campaign was common. In the mid-1990s, T N Seshan introduced the deployment of central armed police forces. The number of paramilitary personnel made available to the EC was always limited as many of them had to be withdrawn from sensitive areas where they were deployed, including at the borders. There was never enough personnel to cover all the sensitive and hypersensitive polling booths, so they had to be rotated from one phase to the next. This led to the introduction of multiple phases that was welcomed by all political parties who believed that the local police was either weak or vulnerable to political pressure.
While this measure definitely made elections peaceful, with acrimonious electoral competition and social media explosion in recent years, it has created more problems than it had solved. While the forces take four to five days (seven to 11 days in the recent elections) to move from one phase to the other, criminals move much faster. Rumours, fake news and hate speech spread in seconds, which, in multiple phases, have disastrous consequences. In fact, this year’s Lok Sabha elections took place over two-and-half months, with the longest ever gaps between phases, and high levels of communal rhetoric. Social media widely disseminated fake news, disinformation and hate speech. The Guardian reported that Meta, owner of Facebook and Instagram, approved AI-manipulated political adverts during India’s 2024 election that spread disinformation, including against Muslims, besides false claims about Opposition leaders.
The social media explosion in the last decade has created a dangerous situation. In January this year, there were 751 million internet users (up from 65 million in 2014), at a penetration rate of 52.4 per cent of the total population. Almost half of them use Facebook. WhatsApp and YouTube are not far behind. CSDS data shows that nearly four times more people use Facebook today than they did in the previous general election. The cheap data revolution, triggered by the launch of the Jio phone network in September 2016, has also transformed Indian politics. Political parties are vying with each other to ride the wave.
Social media’s dangerous influence over the general public has come to light repeatedly. A recent study from Tech Global Institute found that 85 per cent of political content uploaded by Indian influencers across different platforms did not disclose it as sponsored content, thereby hampering transparency and accountability during elections.
Now, the question would be whether going back to a single-phase poll would ensure peaceful elections. I daresay, most certainly, with a range of steps introduced by the EC in the last two decades. The EC has introduced vulnerability mapping of all polling stations in the country, which identifies potential troublemakers who are brought to book under the CRPC with a bond for good conduct. Nearly half a million such persons have been identified in recent times. Campaigns to seize illegal arms have been effective. Even licenced arms are ordered to be surrendered. Most importantly, the non-bailable warrants (NBW) against criminals, including murderers, rapists, kidnappers, etc, which used to stay unexecuted under political pressure for months, even years, with the absconders reported as “untraceable”, are now a thing of the past. The restoration of peace in hitherto militancy and terror-prone areas, as repeatedly claimed by the government, including by no less a person than the Home Minister, strengthens the argument.
There are many existing laws and provisions that can be invoked to ensure peaceful elections. Several powerful provisions in IPC can be applied to control hate speech, cyber crimes and online abuse. These are Section 295A (intentionally insulting religion or belief), Section 153A (promoting enmity between people), Section 499 (defamation), and Section 505 (statements conducing to public mischief), 506 (criminal intimidation). There is also the Representation of the People Act (RP), Section 125 (promoting enmity between classes in connection with election). All these sections provide imprisonment of one to three years.
All we need is to ensure their prompt and even-handed implementation.
A general election can easily be completed in a single phase. All that is needed is about 4,000-5,000 companies, now easily available with the raising of a large number of battalions of different paramilitary forces and restoration of peace in most trouble-prone areas. The RP Act provides 26 days from the notification of the election to the last day of poll. We can add about seven days for political activity such as selection of candidates. Thus, 33-35 days is all we need to conduct a general election. It will reduce the duration of the paramilitary forces being pulled out, save crores of rupees spent on prolonged campaigns and spare our top leaders the trouble of addressing hundreds of election meetings disrupting normal work. Above all, it will cut down the time for mischief and hate mongering. Hasn’t our Prime Minister repeatedly expressed concern about the money spent and work coming to a standstill because of prolonged elections? It is time we addressed his concern.
The writer is former Chief Election Commissioner of India and author of India’s Experiment with Democracy: The Life of a Nation Through its Elections
