The Supreme Court has issued notice on a petition challenging a 2023 law provision that bars courts from hearing cases against serving or former election commissioners for official acts.

BulletsIn

• The Supreme Court issued notice to the Centre on a petition by the Association for Democratic Reforms challenging Section 16 of the 2023 law on Election Commissioners.
• Section 16 bars courts from entertaining civil or criminal proceedings against a serving or former CEC or EC for acts done, or purported to be done, in official duty.
• The law is the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.
• It replaced the 1991 Act, which contained no immunity clause.
• The immunity clause was not in the Bill as introduced and was added by amendment on the day the Rajya Sabha passed it.
• The Government's stated purpose was to let the Commission work independently and without hindrance.
• Under the 2023 Act, a selection committee of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and a Union Cabinet minister nominated by the Prime Minister recommends appointments.
• Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India (March 2023) had directed that, until Parliament legislated, appointments be made on advice of the PM, the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief Justice of India.
• Article 324(5) allows the CEC to be removed only in the manner of a Supreme Court judge, while an Election Commissioner can be removed only on the CEC's recommendation.
• The challenge rests on Article 14, which guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws.
• Presidential and gubernatorial immunity under Article 361 is limited to the term of office, unlike the lifelong protection under Section 16.
• Critics suggest a prior-sanction mechanism or protection limited to good-faith acts as a middle path, while supporters say the clause shields against vexatious litigation.

Tags: ElectionCommissioners, Section16, ADR