ECI NO MORE INDEPENDENT...UNDER MODI CONTROL ? SC JUDGE RAISES CONCERN....7 JUDGES TO DECIDE NOW !!

“It is not enough for the ECI to be independent; it must also appear to be independent.” — Justice Dipankar Datta In his separate opinion on the challenge to the 2023 law governing the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners, Justice Dipankar Datta raised serious constitutional questions about the independence and perceived independence of the Election Commission. Justice Datta observed that the present selection committee — comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition, and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister — gives the executive an effective advantage in the selection process. He questioned whether a minister nominated by the Prime Minister could realistically be expected to oppose the Prime Minister, particularly in light of the principle of collective responsibility. He compared the situation to an umpire being selected by one side in a cricket match: even if the decisions are correct, the appearance of neutrality can remain under suspicion. Justice Datta also reflected on the history of the Election Commission and observed that successive governments had found it convenient to retain influence over institutions constitutionally envisioned to function independently. At the same time, he made clear that this criticism was not directed at any single political party or period. The dispute arises from the 2023 CEC and Other Election Commissioners Appointment Act, which replaced the Chief Justice of India on the selection panel with a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister. The Union government, represented by Attorney General R. Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, argued that Parliament was constitutionally empowered to create the appointment mechanism and that the arrangement laid down in Anoop Baranwal was an interim measure until Parliament enacted a law. Importantly, Justice Datta's observations are prima facie and do not invalidate the 2023 Act. Justice Satish Chandra Sharma took a different view on the question of reference and held that the constitutional issues required consideration by a larger Bench. Because of the split, the papers have been placed before the Chief Justice of India for consideration of an appropriate Constitution Bench. The constitutional validity of the 2023 appointment mechanism therefore remains undecided. #SupremeCourt #JusticeDipankarDatta #ElectionCommission #ECI #ElectionCommissioners #CEC #AnoopBaranwal #ConstitutionBench #IndianConstitution #Article324 #SupremeCourtIndia #LawChakra ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For promotions and Collaborations reach us on- enquire@lawchakra.in Follow us on Twitter:-   / lawchakra   Follow us on Whatsapp : https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaP5... Join this channel to get access to perks:    / @lawchakra   Visit Our Website:- https://lawchakra.in/ Patna High Court Karnataka High Court Live Stream. #Patnahighcourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Supremecourt Courtesy :- Supreme Court of India Books on Constitution:- https://amzn.to/3rqFpbh Tools Used for editing:- 1. https://amzn.to/3EelR1r 2. https://amzn.to/3TWe6o7 For business Enquiries:- enquire@lawchakra.in #SupremeCourt#Mussorrie #advocate #lawyer #legal #livehighcourt #indianlaw #law #live #court #argument #criminaljustice #guiltyminds #learnadvocacy #courtlive #justicelive #lawmotivation #beajudge #ias #judge #law #legal #patnahighcourt #justiceashutoshkumar #judiciary #motivation #learnlaw #IAS #supremecourtofindia #IPS #2022 #Patnahighcourtstream #orissahighcourt #SupremeCourt #Orissahighcourt#GujaratHighCourt #Law #Chakra#JusticeAshutoshkumar *This Video is strictly for Legal Awareness & Education Purpose only.📚 🙏 Follow us on twitter, Instagram and facebook. @Lawchakra 👉Twitter   / lawchakra   👉 Instagram.   / lawchakra   📑*Fair Use Policy -* Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the copyright act 1976, allowance is made for fair use for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use.