Debating the Legal Shield: Accountability and Immunity of Election Commissioners

Former election commissioner Ashok Lavasa questions the immunity provided to election commissioners under the new CEC and EC Appointment Act, 2023. Lavasa argues that decisions should withstand judicial scrutiny. A Supreme Court plea contests the broad immunity, suggesting it grants excessive protection to election officials.

Former election commissioner Ashok Lavasa has raised concerns about the legal immunity granted to current and former election commissioners, arguing that such protection limits accountability. Speaking at a panel discussion on election commission accountability, Lavasa emphasized the importance of decisions being subject to judicial review.

Lavasa labeled the immunity as 'extraordinary', questioning if other public institutions benefit from similar protection. He asserted that in a democracy, accountability remains crucial and decisions should be justified in courts, if challenged.

The Supreme Court has agreed to examine a plea against this immunity, as critics argue it provides excessive power, shielding commissioners from legal proceedings despite allegations of misconduct in office.

(With inputs from agencies.)