'Generic bullet points ... condescending': Congress hits back at Election Commission over rebuttal on party's Haryana poll claims

NEW DELHI: The Congress on Friday slammed the Election Commission for its " generic " response to the party's complaint over alleged irregularities in the recently concluded Haryana assembly elections, particularly criticising the poll panel's "tone and tenor, and the language used".

The ECI gave a non-reply to @INCIndia's specific complaints in 20 Vidhan Sabha constituencies in Haryana. Here is the INC's response to this non-reply. pic.twitter.com/dX98FkbEvU

— Jairam Ramesh (@Jairam_Ramesh) November 1, 2024

"The Election Commission's reply is nothing more than generic set of bullet points on how machines work rather than specific clarification on our Haryana complaints ... While our complaints in Haryana were specific, the EC's response is generic and focused on diminishing complaints and petitioners," the party said in a letter addressed to the Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar.

The Congress also took a jab at the EC for giving a "clean chit to itself" and slammed the poll panel for its " condescending " reply.

"If the EC's goal is to strip itself of last vestiges of neutrality, then it's doing remarkable job at creating that impression," the Congress added.

What Congress said

• "First, the ECI prefaces its reply by stating the 'exceptional' nature of its indulgence in engaging with us on the issues raised. We do not know who is advising or guiding the Hon'ble Commission, but it seems that the Commission has forgotten that it is a body set up under the Constitution and charged with the discharge of certain crucial functions- both administrative and quasi- judicial. If the Commission grants a recognised National Party a hearing or examines issues raised by them in good faith it is not an 'exception' or 'indulgence'. It is the performance of a duty which it is required to do."
• "If the Commission is refusing to grant us a hearing or refusing to engage on certain complaints (which it has done in the past) then the law allows recourse to the Higher Courts' extraordinary jurisdiction to compel the ECI to discharge this function (as happened in 2019). Se let us disabuse the ECI of this notion that it has in any way, shape or form indulged us."
• "Second, the recent tone of the Commission's communications to the INC is a matter that we refuse to take lightly anymore. Every reply from the ECI now seems to be laced with ad-hominem attacks on either individual leaders or the party itself. The INC's communications confine themselves to issues and are written with a regard for the high office of the CEC and his brother Commissioners. This can be verified from the INC's representations which are in the public domain. However, the ECI's reply are written in a tone that is condescending. If the current ECI's goal is to strip itself of the last vestiges of neutrality, then it is doing a remarkable job at creating that impression. Judges who write decisions do not attack or demonise the party raising the issues. However, if the ECI persists then we shall have no choice but to seek legal recourse to expunge such remarks (a remedy with which the ECI is familiar since it unsuccessfully sought to do the same with a High Court's unflattering but accurate observations after Covid)."
• "Third, the 'pattern' sought to be identified by the ECI in Para 8 of its reply is disingenuous, the vast majority of issues raised relate to that short period from the announcement of the Model Code of Conduct to the conclusion of the Elections i.e. the date of counting. The causes of action arise quickly, in literal minutes, and sometimes only become apparent after the results are declared and sometimes after the information from other booths can be compared. If they are not redressed on the ground then they become redundant. And then the only remedy available is an Election Petition which is a lengthy process taking years to resolve. Thus, we approach the ECI with whatever information we have, and the ECI with the vast resources at its command, examines and reviews this information to see if the same is correct. Many times, the ECI has found our information to be correct. Other times, not so. But we do not name and shame the ECI for those moments after the Election is over."
• "Fourth, if we were bad faith actors, then we would never engage with the ECI to begin with. We would not painstakingly document our grievances and present them with legal precedent and arguments. Instead, we would focus on naming and shaming the Commission with examples from the ECI's own recent history which do not shroud it with glory. We would highlight that of over a hundred complaints against the PM and HM, the ECI has taken action in precisely zero complaints, while calling our party president and former party president to account for their actions/speeches. We would point out how the ECI never published a dissent note, actively suppressing it instead, by a former Commissioner in this regard. We would point out that the ECI has almost always fought any move for transparency and increase in VVPAT verification numbers, with the same having to be ordered by the Supreme Court. We challenge the ECI to fact check the above since it finds the INC's misgivings to be based on phantoms. We have many such examples, far more than the same 2-3 examples the ECI seems adamant on repeating."
• "Finally, as stated at the outset we are not surprised that the ECI has examined our complaints and given itself a clean chit. The answer given to the question of the machines' fluctuating batteries seeks to confuse rather than clarify. At any rate, the ECI reply is nothing more than a standard and generic set of bullets on how the machines function rather than a specific clarification on specific complaints. In short, while our complaints were specific the ECI response is generic and focused on diminishing the complaints and the petitioners."

The sharp criticism came days after the EC categorically dismissed the party's claims of irregularities in the Haryana Assembly elections as "baseless" and "frivolous".

The poll panel had emphasised that it found no evidence to support Congress's allegations, particularly those concerning the display of a 99% battery status on Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) during vote counting.

The ECI further said that such unfounded accusations could incite public unrest and disrupt social order, urging political parties to refrain from making sensational complaints during critical electoral phases. In a letter to Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge , the ECI criticised the party for raising doubts about electoral integrity without substantial evidence, stating that this behavior undermines the credibility of the electoral process

In response to the EC's dismissal of Congress's allegations, BJP leaders had reiterated their confidence in the electoral process and characterised Congress's claims as a "habitual pattern of questioning electoral integrity whenever they face defeat".

BJP leader Sanjay Seth stated, "It is Congress' character that when they lose, they doubt EVMs and the ECI".

The BJP also emphasised its successful performance in the elections, securing 48 out of 90 seats, and described it as a clear mandate from the people of Haryana.

The party said the EC's rebuttal was validation of their electoral victory and a rejection of what they termed "frivolous complaints" from Congress.
(With inputs from agencies)