Critically assess the CEC and ECs Act, 2023 in ensuring the independence of the ECI.

Article 324(2) always envisaged a law to govern appointments to the Election Commission, but none existed until Anoop Baranwal (2023) prompted Parliament to enact the CEC and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023 [1][2]. The Act secures the form of institutional independence, while leaving its substance vulnerable to executive influence.

Where the Act strengthens independence

• Statutory footing: appointment, conditions of service and tenure are now regulated by law rather than by unwritten executive discretion [2].
• Opposition voice: the Selection Committee includes the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha — the first statutory role for the opposition in choosing election managers [1].
• Collegiality preserved: business is transacted unanimously "as far as possible", and differences are settled by majority opinion, giving the CEC no veto and each EC an equal vote [2].

Where it falls short

• Executive-dominated panel: the PM and a Union Cabinet Minister can outvote the LoP; the Supreme Court had proposed the CJI in place of the Minister [1].
• Unequal security of tenure: the CEC is removable only like a Supreme Court judge, but an EC only on the CEC's recommendation — inconsistent with T.N. Seshan (1995), which held ECs to be at par with the CEC [1].
• Diluted service conditions: salary is de-linked from a Supreme Court judge's (fixed by Parliament under Article 125) and tied to the Cabinet Secretary, fixed by the government [1].
• Narrow eligibility: only serving or former Secretary-rank officers qualify, despite the Commission's quasi-judicial functions [1].

Reforms to close the gap

• Extend the CEC's removal protection to ECs and restore the Article 125 pay linkage [1].
• Widen eligibility beyond the bureaucracy, and publish each member's recorded position after a fixed interval, as the RBI's Monetary Policy Committee does on the 14th day [1][3].

The Act is a necessary first step that ends an unregulated vacuum, yet independence demands parity in tenure and a balanced selection panel. Aligning it with judicial guidance would make the ECI's autonomy substantive, not merely procedural.