What does the law say about CEC’s removal? | Explained

The controversy highlights the evolving constitutional mechanism for appointing the Election Commission of India. Originally, Article 324 allowed the Executive (President) to appoint the CEC and ECs, pending a law by Parliament. The Supreme Court's landmark judgment in Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India (2023) temporarily established a collegium comprising the PM, Leader of Opposition (LoP), and the Chief Justice of India (CJI) to ensure institutional independence. However, Parliament swiftly enacted the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, replacing the CJI with a Union Cabinet Minister. This shift is crucial for UPSC mains, as it raises questions about the balance of power, the doctrine of separation of powers, and whether executive dominance compromises the ECI's neutrality—a core pillar of a healthy democracy.

The article details the distinct constitutional safeguards regarding the removal of Election Commissioners. Under Article 324(5), the CEC enjoys security of tenure identical to a Supreme Court judge, requiring a special majority in Parliament for removal based on 'proved misbehaviour or incapacity' as per the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. Conversely, other Election Commissioners lack this robust protection and can be removed solely upon the CEC's recommendation. This disparity often fuels debates on whether all members of the multi-member Election Commission of India should have parity in removal procedures to ensure equal autonomy. Furthermore, Section 16 of the 2023 Act introduces a new layer of protection, shielding current and former CEC/ECs from civil or criminal proceedings for actions taken in the discharge of official duties, though it does not explicitly grant a blanket immunity from arrest.

The ongoing legal challenge to the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023 is a critical area for Prelims and Mains. The recent split verdict in the Supreme Court regarding whether to refer the challenge to a larger Constitution Bench underscores the complex constitutional questions at play. At issue is whether the exclusion of the judiciary from the selection process violates the basic structure doctrine by potentially undermining free and fair elections. Aspirants must track this case, as a final ruling will solidify the jurisprudence surrounding independent constitutional bodies and the limits of parliamentary legislative power under Article 324(2).