Editorial 1 : Moving the spotlight to grassroots democracy

Context

Empowering and reforming the State Election Commissions are crucial steps to be taken.

Introduction

The Election Commission of India (ECI), with its track record of conducting free and fair elections, and on time, to Parliament and State legislatures, has emerged as one of independent India’s most credible institutions. Yet, there are 34 State Election Commissions (SECs) that need serious attention and strengthening.

Systemic disempowerment of State Election Commissions

• State Election Commission: The SECs were brought into existence by Articles 243K and 243ZA of the Constitution (introduced by the 73rd and 74th amendments in 1993).
• Powers of State Election Commission : The superintendence, direction, and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections to panchayats and urban local governments (ULGs).
• Disempowered and litigation burden: SECs are increasingly disempowered and, in certain cases, even in litigation with their State governments.

Current pertaining to State Election Commissions

• State Elections to Panchayati Raj Institutions delayed: The Karnataka SEC filed a contempt petition against the Government of Karnataka for reneging on its commitment to the High Court in response to an earlier petition filed by the SEC to allow it to proceed with the delimitation of panchayat raj institutions and conduct elections (already delayed by over three and a half years).
• Conducting State Elections: The Karnataka government had assured the High Court in December 2023 that it would publish the delimitation and reservation details within two weeks to enable the SEC to conduct elections.
• Hindering Elections: Cases filed by the Andhra Pradesh SEC and several others in 2020, the Supreme Court struck down an ordinance of Andhra Pradesh, which hindered elections to the panchayat raj institutions.

Performance Audits results

• No elected council: Audit of the implementation of the 74th Constitutional (Amendment) Act by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India across 18 States shows that 1,560 out of 2,240 urban local governments (70%) did not have an elected council at the time of the CAG audit.
• Delay and Disempowerment: The CAG, in its Karnataka report, observed that the disempowerment of SECs is many times the cause for delays in on time elections which undermines local governments and erode the trust of citizens in these important public institutions.
• Janaagraha’s Annual Survey of India’s City Systems (ASICS) 2023: shows that only 11 out of 34 States and Union Territories have empowered SECs to conduct ward delimitation.
• Few states are empowered: These States and Union Territories (namely, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Daman and Diu, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Kerala, Ladakh, Maharashtra, and West Bengal) account for only 35% of India’s population, as in the 2011 Census.

The need for free and fair elections

• Regular and fair elections to local governments: are non-negotiable for meaningful grass-roots democracy and ensuring effective first-mile service delivery in the cities and the villages of the country.
• Sacrosanct timeline to conduct elections: The requirement to conduct elections before the expiry of the five-year term of elected local governments is a constitutional mandate and must be as sacrosanct as the elections to the Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabhas.
• SECs must be fully empowered: on all matters of local government elections, on a par with the Election Commission of India, as observed by the Supreme Court in Kishan Singh Tomar vs Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad and Others (2006).

Electoral reforms to strengthen third tier

• Transparency and Independence: First, there is a need to bring SECs on a par with the Election Commission of India in terms of transparency and independence in constitution and appointment.
• Reforms in selection committee: We can aspire to a three-member SEC which is appointed by a committee that comprises the Chief Minister, Leader of Opposition in the Legislative Assembly (Vidhan Sabha), and the Chief Justice of the High Court rather than a State government-appointed SEC which is just not working by amending the 74th Constitutional (Amendment) Act.
• Delimitation of ward boundaries and reservations of seats: It must be mandated only at fixed intervals, say once in 10 years else it can cause undue delays in elections to local governments.
• Vesting of powers to State election commission: of ward delimitation and reservation of seats for local governments.
• SEC must be empowered to reserve positions: of mayors/presidents, deputy mayors/vice-presidents of the local governments, say once in 10 years, where applicable.
• Timeline of Elections: Elections to these positions are delayed inordinately after local elections as State governments fail to publish the reservation roster to these positions on time.
• Addressing the malpractices by presiding officers appointed by the State governments: an example is the election of the Mayor in the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation Council in 2024. SECs, should possibly be entrusted with the election of mayors, presidents, chairpersons, and standing committees.

Conclusion

The State Election Commissions (SECs) still face significant challenges unlike the credibility established by Election Commission of India(EIC). These challenges, including systemic disempowerment and delays in elections, undermine the democratic process at the local level. Steps should be taken towards strengthening SECs by bringing them on par with the ECI. Transparent and independent appointments, and empowering them with the necessary authority is crucial for sustaining democracy and ensuring effective governance at the grassroots level. The 73^rd amendment Act should strive for more inclusion through dialogues, and discussions.

---

Editorial 2 : Biotech enigma

Context:

Biotechnology initiatives need long-term capital investments.

Introduction

Earlier this week the Cabinet cleared a proposal, though without specifying a budget, called BioE3 or Biotechnology for Economy, Environment and Employment. Its thrust is to boost manufacturing in the biotechnology sector.

Significance and Scope of  Indian Biotechnology Department

• Biotech Departmental achievement: in vaccine development, diagnostics and biologicals, that has bolstered India’s reputation as a ‘vaccine factory’, and various other cases since 1986 is commendable.
• Need of Biotechnology sectors: There are billion-dollar conglomerates today that rest on high-value microbes, gene-modification technologies, bio-plastics, bio-materials, and high-precision medical devices.
• Lagging in IT revolution Despite the know-how and human resource capital, only a few Indian biotechs have global resonance, as there are few local manufacturers who can supply Indian laboratories/startups with the ingredients and devices to make products.
• Imports dependence: The BioE3 policy aims to correct the reliance on imports means that India loses its international competitiveness.
• Funding requirements and private partnerships for Biotech’s: Despite funding in last four years, India needs to be going beyond and setting up companies, in public private partnership mode, to bolster biotechnology manufacturing.
• Ramping up biotechnology manufacturing: There are six verticals that this initiative envisages: bio-based chemicals and enzymes; functional foods and smart proteins; precision biotherapeutics; climate-resilient agriculture; carbon capture, and futuristic marine and space research.
• Less focus on fossils: Futurists have been saying that the era of fossil-fuel industrialisation is over and humanity will have to rely on the natural world — for food and for making consumer products.
• Environmental concerns: This is to solve the global problem of non-biodegradable waste and carbon emissions.

Way forward

Future industries must be grounded in environmentally benign products, and this is impossible without sophisticated biotechnology. By setting up bio-foundries and bio-artificial intelligence hubs, the policy hopes there will be avenues for a variety of biotechnologists to congregate.

Conclusion

India’s woes with manufacturing have chronic causes. Without establishing enabling grounds for long-term capital investment — and these have little to do with biotechnology per se — top-down initiatives will have limited impact. The BioE3 policy must be a deeply collaborative effort between Centre and States. Rather than expect quick returns, the government must provide financial and infrastructural support over the long term. A long-term capital investment, and a patient approach to building the necessary infrastructure for a robust biotech industry will boost the sectors confidence.