"Using children as proxy campaigners undermines both childhood and the voter's free choice." Discuss, with reference to recent judicial observations.

In the 2026 Tamil Nadu Assembly election, school children were drawn into rallies and into YouTube reels made at home that urged their parents to vote for the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) [1]. Proxy campaigning of this kind turns civic participation into exploitation, and the law has not yet caught up.

Recent judicial observations

• The Madras High Court (Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy) dismissed an election petition on this issue. It still called the practice "in bad taste", said it reflected "poor parenting" and described it as a "cheap and politically motivated act" [1].
• The Court left it to Parliament to decide whether this should be a ground for setting aside an election [1]. This exposes a gap: Section 123, RP Act, 1951 does not list it as a corrupt practice [4].

Undermining childhood

• Instrumentalisation: children are used as props, which goes against the best-interests principle (UNCRC Art. 3) [3].
• Polarisation: partisan slogans lead to conflict among peers and emotional stress.
• Labour-like use: the ECI links such work to the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 [2].
• Digital footprint: reels leave a permanent online record that children cannot meaningfully consent to.

Distorting the voter's free choice

• Children who cannot vote become emotional persuaders at home. Older voters reported that children urged them to back TVK [1].
• This matches the spirit, though not the letter, of undue influence, defined as interference with the "free exercise of any electoral right" (Sec. 123(2)) [4].
• Appeals to sentiment push out scrutiny of policy.

The other side

• UNCRC Art. 12 (right to be heard) and Art. 15 (association and assembly) recognise that children have civic agency [3].
• The ECI does not treat a child who is merely accompanying a parent as a violation [2]. Learning about civic life is different from scripted mobilisation.

Way forward

• Give statutory force to the ECI's February 2024 "zero tolerance" advisory, which itself drew on a 2014 Bombay High Court order [2].
• Amend the RP Act, as the Court suggested [1], and hold parties accountable for campaign content made by children online.

Proxy campaigning therefore harms both the child and the integrity of the vote. The judiciary has rightly flagged the problem while respecting Parliament's domain. A calibrated law that bans the instrumental use of children while preserving their participation rights would honour Article 39(f), which protects childhood against exploitation, and would strengthen free and fair elections.