The Congress on Thursday hailed as “historic” the verdict of the Supreme Court that the election commissioners should be appointed by a three-member committee but strongly demanded a similar arrangement for the Enforcement Directorate (ED) which was targeting Opposition parties to politically help the Narendra Modi government.

Congress spokesperson Abhishek Singhvi said: “This historic judgment has come despite strong opposition by the Narendra Modi government which filed counter affidavits and argued through senior law officers. This ruling has come after the experience of the Election Commission’s behaviour in the last eight-nine years when they refused to act on clear violations of model code by Prime Minister Modi and Amit Shah.”

The Supreme Court ruled that the chief election commissioner and the election commissioners will be appointed by a committee consisting of the Prime Minister, the leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India. The Congress said such a reform was long overdue in the key democratic institution assigned to ensure a level-playing field in the elections.

Asked why such a move wasn’t contemplated in the past, Singhvi said: “Indian never saw such vicious attacks on democratic institutions in the last 70 years. Leaders who operated the systems never showed such desperation to control and subvert institutions. Not even the Vajpayee government did that. The Modi government has a unique position in that context.”

He recalled how the election commissioners refused to act on specific complaints against Modi and Shah and the Supreme Court had to rebuke them in 2019 to take a decision either way. “We all know how one election commissioner was harassed when he dissented and he had to quit the EC.”

Pointing to the government’s argument in the court, Singhvi said: “The government argued vehemently against its loss of control over this process. They argued that 'the mechanism (of appointment by the government) is so robust that no one can go rogue except for stray incidents. These stray incidents cannot be a ground for the court to interfere'. This in itself is telling. There have been hundreds if not thousands of complaints filed against the ruling regime’s excesses by multiple parties over the last few years and only once has an election commissioner raised his voice for which he was unjustly penalised and punished.”

The Supreme Court had in the past ordered a similar committee for the appointment of CBI chief and chief vigilance commissioner.

Using this opportunity, the Congress demanded that the appointment of ED director should also be done by a similar committee.

Singhvi said: “The ED is running amok. The ED has become the political brother of the government, selectively targeting Opposition leaders and letting off those who join the BJP. There has been a rise of more than 1000 per cent in the number of cases ED filed in the Modi regime and over 95 per cent are against Opposition leaders. The conviction rate is pathetic.”

The Supreme Court is hearing petitions against extensions given to the incumbent ED director Sanjay Kumar Mishra. The Congress had strongly opposed the amendment in the CVC Act through an ordinance to give piecemeal extensions to officers. Mishra got the third extension and can get two more under the new arrangement. He has already spent five years in the ED.

When the Modi government decided to extend the tenures of the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to five years and that too on a piecemeal basis, the Congress had said the sole intention was to control the investigating agencies to serve “personal and political” interests.

Singhvi had predicted then: “The decision was driven by the dangerous cocktail of greed and fear. There is no public interest. The Prime Minister wants to control the agencies to protect secrets, save friends and torment the Opposition. They are creating security for themselves instead of creating security for the nation.”

Singhvi had explained at that time: “This ordinance says that I will keep you on probation, I will keep you on a leash, in a master-servant relationship. I will ask you every six months, nine months — look, your next extension is due. Have you behaved? Have you done the master’s bidding? If you have, I may consider an extension. If you haven’t, tough luck, go home. I have the power, this act gives me the power to make piecemeal, partial extensions. This is the very opposite of security of tenure and independence.”