"Judicial remedies alone cannot protect constitutional institutions." Examine this with reference to recent debates on electoral integrity.

Article 324 makes the Election Commission of India (ECI) the umpire of democracy. The recent dispute over appointing the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) shows that courts can declare independence but cannot, alone, secure it.

What judicial remedies achieved

• Anoop Baranwal (2023): a Constitution Bench rejected executive-dominated selection and set an interim PM–LoP–CJI panel [2].
• Public interest litigation, including by the Association for Democratic Reforms, put the 2023 Act under judicial scrutiny [3].

Why courts alone fall short

• Legislative override: Baranwal's panel was only "till a law is made by the Parliament" [3]. The 2023 Act replaced the CJI with a minister the PM nominates, giving the government a 2:1 majority [1].
• Presumption of constitutionality: in Jaya Thakur (2024), the Court called a stay "an exception and not the rule". It feared "chaos" on the eve of the Lok Sabha polls [3]. Commissioners chosen under the challenged law then ran the general election.
• Cannot write law: restoring the CJI would mean rewriting Section 7(1) [3].
• Delay and irreversibility: six names were shortlisted for two posts, against the ten the Court thought necessary. Still, the appointments stood [3]. The challenge remains unresolved over two years later.
• Gaps beyond judicial reach: ECs are removable on the CEC's recommendation alone [1]. The ECI also lacks an independent secretariat [2].

Safeguards beyond the courtroom

• Parliament: adopt the panels proposed by the Goswami Committee (1990), NCRWC (2002) or Law Commission (2015). None gave the government a majority [2]. Require full shortlists in advance.
• Executive: create an independent secretariat and widen eligibility beyond Secretary-rank officers [2].
• Global practice: use legislative checks such as US Senate confirmation and UK Commons oversight [2].
• Citizens: litigation, media scrutiny and voter vigilance. The Court quoted Ambedkar: a good Constitution "will prove to be bad" if those implementing it are not good [3].

Courts set the standard of independence; Parliament, the executive and citizens must enforce it. Three steps are needed: a consensus-based selection law, an independent secretariat and an early decision on the pending challenge. Together they would make free and fair elections, part of the basic structure, real in practice and advance SDG 16's goal of accountable institutions.