It will not be an understatement to say that the ongoing assembly election campaign in Uttar Pradesh resembles a mini-general election. Spread across seven phases, just two short of the nine phases over which the 2014 general elections were staggered, the Election Commission (EC) has committed an overkill by unnecessarily stretching state elections to the point where it has affected governance, the tone and tenor of the campaign, and election expenditure. The EC announced the dates for the elections on January 4 to legislative assemblies in Punjab, Goa, Uttarakhand, Manipur and UP. The Punjab and Goa polls were held on February 4 and Uttarakhand on February 15. In contrast, the seven-phased UP elections began on February 11 in Western UP districts and then moved to the neighbouring Rohilkand region on February 15. From here, the polling shifted to central UP on February 19, Bundelkhand on February 23 and the eastern districts of UP on February 27, March 4 and March 8.

COMMERCIAL BREAK
SCROLL TO CONTINUE READING

One would wonder why the Election Commission announced a long-drawn campaign that has tested the nerves and tempers of politicians and kept the state and central administration from moving forward on governance.

The best argument for staggered polling is that the concentration of paramilitary forces in one region will give a sense of security to voters. Way back in 2002, the EC was able to hold the UP elections in just three phases. The state administration and law and order has only improved in the intervening years and the security threat has also proportionately reduced. Moreover, the use of electronic voting machines and voter identification cards have reduced earlier practices of ballot stuffing, rigging and booth capturing. There is also no indication that the staggering of elections have reduced the practices of bribing voters with incentives. 

The expenditure incurred, both by the government and political parties, when elections become prolonged also needs to be considered. The huge cost of electioneering is also a matter of concern considering that parties need to invest more resources in ferrying star campaigners using helicopters, paying party workers for campaigning, and advertising in the media. Yet another unintended consequence of the long campaign has been the intemperate language by politicians. The Election Commission has had a tough time reining in the politicians and must take the blame for losing control over politicians. Worse still, the ranks of those who have used objectionable language includes the who’s who of Indian politics.

When Prime Minister Narendra Modi pitched for simultaneous elections as a means to ensure that elections do not intrude into governance, he will not miss the irony of what the seven-phased elections has subjected his government to. In Bihar, Modi had addressed 31 election rallies, while in UP he will have addressed at least 21 rallies by the time electioneering is over. Many union ministers are also out campaigning in the states. The PM and his cabinet cannot be blamed as the outcome of the elections will be seen as a mid-term review of the central government. However, it is governance that suffers. With the model code in effect, development works are also stalled. The EC will do well to compress the election schedule and the number of phases, next time around.