Is the Election Commission of India a Lapdog of the Modi Government?

Is the Election Commission of India a Lapdog of the Modi Government?

Faces of the Accused Lapdogs

The Election Commission of India (ECI) – once a proud institution overseeing the world’s largest democracy – has now, according to some, been reduced to little more than a loyal pet. Yes, you read that right. Recently, one election expert went as far as to call the ECI the "lapdog" of the Modi government during a social media broadcast. Judging by recent events in Haryana, where the ECI’s influence seems to extend only as far as issuing liquor ban orders, this claim doesn’t seem entirely far-fetched. Of course, while liquor shops are dutifully closed, it appears that political parties aligned with the BJP have conveniently forgotten about the ban and are busily handing out free alcohol like it’s party season. Because, after all, who can say no to some good old-fashioned "electoral spirits?"

Then, there’s the not-so-small matter of ₹50 crore—no mere pocket change—being spent by losing candidates on this election. Anywhere else, this might raise eyebrows, but in Indian politics, this kind of cash flow barely causes a stir. At this point, you might be wondering: Why isn’t the Election Commission cracking down on this? Isn’t it their job to ensure fair elections? Ah, sweet summer child. The answer, as it turns out, is rather simple. Why would the ECI take action when they seem so perfectly content lounging in their cozy lapdog position, wagging their tail in loyalty to the powers that be?

Adding more fuel to the fire is the release of Ram Rahim, supposedly for a family emergency, under strict conditions that he should not engage in any political activities. Yet, he has been spotted campaigning with Haryana Chief Minister Khattar, drumming up support in BJP rallies. With a significant following in Haryana, especially in Panchkula, Ram Rahim’s sudden release seems to serve the BJP’s interests all too well, stirring the political waters just in time for elections. And where is the ECI? Either they’re blind or they’re failing to fulfill their constitutional duty to ensure a fair election.

But let’s not stop there. In a move that feels more like a game show than an election, voters are reportedly being offered ₹3,000 for their votes, with a special bonus for those who can round up 90 voters—enough to win themselves a brand-new scooter worth ₹80,000! It’s practically democracy on wheels. It’s truly heartwarming to see such “innovative voter engagement” strategies in action. The only thing missing is a points system and a leaderboard for the most loyal voters.

Yet, the burning question that no one seems to want to ask is: Where is all this money coming from? Who’s funding this extravagant vote-buying spree? Well, don’t expect the ECI to investigate anytime soon. They seem to have misplaced their backbone somewhere along the way and have instead opted for the much more comfortable role of turning a blind eye. After all, when the party in question is the BJP—a party that has never been shy about its deep pockets—it’s much easier to sit back and pretend nothing’s happening.

Contrast this with the days of yore, when the ECI was led by officials with, dare I say it, a spine. Back when the Congress was in power, even the smallest violation was met with strict punishment. The rules were clear, and the Commission was unwavering. But times have changed, and with the BJP at the helm, the ECI’s teeth seem to have mysteriously vanished. Coincidence? I think not.

Even Arvind Kejriwal, a man who’s no stranger to controversy, once had the audacity to suggest voters take the money offered by corrupt politicians but vote with their conscience. “It’s your money anyway,” he quipped, pointing out the hypocrisy of parties that bribe voters with their own tax rupees. But in Haryana, the situation has become even more sinister. Candidates are allegedly photocopying voters’ IDs as a scare tactic to ensure that the voters they bribe stick to their side. So, not only do these candidates insult the voters’ intelligence, they also throw in a healthy dose of intimidation for good measure. Democracy at its finest, right?

But can we really blame people for accepting the cash? After all, poverty runs deep in many parts of India, and for some, this is a rare opportunity for a windfall. It might feel like selling their future for a few thousand rupees, but when the present is bleak, the future seems like a distant concern. And let’s be honest: when the government is constantly selling out the public interest, maybe voters just figure they’ll get a piece of the pie.

However, if the BJP loses in Haryana (gasp!), the aftershocks will be felt far and wide. The party, led by a man with a famously questionable degree in political science (what even is "entire political science," again?), will be left reeling. But don’t worry, this small detail—like the fact that their leader might not actually be qualified—doesn’t seem to bother anyone. After all, in a country where many people brush off blatant lies with a casual "everyone’s corrupt," what’s one more deception?

Of course, we can’t forget the critics of other political leaders like Kejriwal, who is often accused of corruption but, curiously, without a shred of evidence. It’s almost as if some people just enjoy throwing mud to see what sticks. But while Kejriwal's detractors fail to present any proof, the BJP’s corruption allegations come with reams of documentation. You’d think that might make a difference, but in the age of selective outrage, facts seem to matter less and less.

The real tragedy here is the lack of public awareness about how policies are made and how corruption seeps into every crack of the system. What we need is a dedicated channel to educate citizens on how policies are formed, who signs off on them, and how corruption embeds itself at every level. A channel that could teach people where to look, how to track the misuse of public funds, and hold leaders accountable. Imagine a world where voters could actually check the quality of the work being done in their name and demand better. But alas, in our current reality, where the ECI behaves more like a pampered pet than a fierce guardian of democracy, such dreams seem far-fetched.