"The top leadership comprising all three commissioners functions, acts as a team and it is discharging its constitutional responsibilities with firmness and with the required promptitude ... We also strongly deny that there are any differences among ourselves. All decisions, including in this issue relating to Varanasi meeting venue ... have been taken only unanimously," Sampath told PTI in an interview.
Refuting Brahma's statement that the denial of permission for Narendra Modi's Beniabagh rally should have been communicated promptly, Sampath said the commission had acted with full alacrity. After verifying ground realities from district administration, which were further verified at the level of Chief Secretary and DGP, a suitable reply was also given (to BJP leader Arun Jaitley)," he clarified.
"All this exercise was done from mid-day on May 7 and there was no delay in either taking the decision or conveying it," he added.
On why Brahma chose to air his differences over the Varanasi issue, making EC appear as a divided house, Sampath said as far he was concerned, "my relations with him (Brahma) had been excellent". "I can tell you we never have any disagreement which cannot be sorted out by discussion. We always discuss, we come to an agreement. All our decisions so far have been unanimous, including this issue (Varanasi)," he said.
Responding to senior BJP leader Arun Jaitley's comment about "timid" men in high offices who were incapable of taking bold decisions, the CEC said "we don't agree. We dismiss that kind of a charge that we are a timid people, etc."
Sampath said every case has to be examined on its merits. In the Varanasi case, the EC found that law and order administration at the local level had taken relevant facts, circumstances and all professional inputs into account, about the suitability of the venue for public meeting. He added that the fact that the meeting was to be held in the evening had led to the security and suitability concerns, and the commission did not find it appropriate to substitute the local officer's judgement with its own.
"We really do not think there is any kind of boldness involved in overruling that and asking them that they should go ahead with the meeting at the same venue at the same time, whatever may be the consequences because this is a matter of law and order," he explained.
Sampath also rejected any bias in allowing roadshow by Rahul Gandhi and UP chief minister Akhilesh Yadav, but denying permission to Modi to address a public meeting in his constituency from a venue of BJP's choice. "Security perceptions about leaders are person specific," he pointed out.
Asked whether he regretted that Modi was not given permission to hold a meeting in a place of his choice, Sampath said, "... The commission will always regret when a campaigner, particularly a leader of that stature, is not able to address a public meeting ... But reasons behind the actions of the DM we have no reason to disagree with."
When queried whether its decision to appoint a special observer showed less faith in the returning officer, Sampath said the appointment of Tamil Nadu CEO Praveen Kumar was a typical response of the commission to meet any local situation.
"It does not in any way mean it is a reflection on DM or RO or the district administration. But at the same time, since it is a critical election...with such high-profile candidates, we thought instead of each and every issue from the field coming to the commission, it would be better if a senior representative of the commission is stationed there."
About the alleged double standards in dealing with the complaint against Modi and against Rahul Gandhi, Sampath said the difference was in Modi's case it was covered by the provisions under the Representation of the People Act and in the other one, it was a grey area involving getting getting inputs from the field.
Responding to attacks on the commission, particularly from parties like the BJP, Samajwadi Party and Trinamool Congress, the CEC said people can disagree with the commission, not accept its decisions and have complaints.
"But all this must be within some limits of decency, decorum and dignity. Targeting the commission personally or faulting it in a rather undignified manner is not proper discourse," he said.
0 comments:
Post a Comment