Context: 

The Supreme Court of India verdict taking away the power to appoint members of the Election Commission of India (ECI) from the sole domain of the executive is a major boost to the independence of the election watchdog.

Supreme Court Verdict: 

• The Court has ruled that a three-member committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, or the leader of the single largest Opposition party, and the Chief Justice of India (CJI), will choose the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (EC) until a law in passed. 
• Justice K.M. Joseph, who has authored the main verdict, has based the Court’s decision on “the inertia” of the legislature and the  perceived vacuum in the absence of a law. 
• The court emphasized the importance of the ECI’s independence from the executive and the absence of any expectation of loyalty or reciprocity. 

On Election Commissioner Appointment:

• Article 324 says the President should appoint the CEC and Commissioners, subject to any law made in that behalf by Parliament. 
• However, successive regimes have failed to enact a law. 
• It has been repeatedly recommended: The Justice Tarktincle committee 1975; the Dinesh Goswami committee, May 1990; the second administrative reforms commission, January 2007, and by the Law Commission of India in its 255th report of March 2015. 

Government Stand: 

• The government claimed that the existing system for appointing members to the Election Commission of India (ECI) was working well and there was no need for change.

Concern: 

• The current system of appointing a high-ranking civil servant through a recommendation from the Prime Minister was deemed weak. 
• However, the presence of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) on the selection panel was questioned as a means of preserving independence. 

Suggestion: 

• The Supreme Court suggested that an independent law be enacted to ensure the ECI’s independence, without seeking to preserve the current convention.

News Source: The Hindu