Discuss the role of the Election Commission of India in the light of the evolution of the Model Code of Conduct. (Answer in 250…

The Model Code of Conduct (MCC) has evolved from a voluntary restraint into the principal framework through which the Election Commission of India (ECI) regulates electoral behaviour. Under Article 324, the ECI superintends, directs and controls elections; the MCC, though not statutory, has become an extension of this constitutional mandate. It began in 1960 in Kerala assembly elections as a voluntary code, was circulated by the ECI to all parties in 1962 and 1968, expanded in 1979, comprehensively revised in 1991, and later expanded through post-2010 digital and social-media guidelines and 2024 ECI advisories on AI-generated synthetic media and deepfakes.

This evolution transformed the ECI from a passive referee into an active regulator. It can issue directions, restrict media coverage, restrict meetings, and seek police assistance, while amendments to the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and Supreme Court interventions have given the code quasi-statutory force (its application from the announcement of the poll schedule was settled by consent in Union of India v. Harbans Singh Jalal, 2001). In S. Subramaniam Balaji v. State of Tamil Nadu (2013), the Court held that freebies are not corrupt practices and their regulation is for Parliament, but directed the ECI to frame guidelines on election manifestos. In Abhiram Singh v. C.D. Commachen (2017), the Court held that appeals on grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language of candidates or voters are corrupt practices under Section 123(3) of the RPA, reinforcing the ECI’s duty to prevent communal agitation.

Yet the MCC’s non-statutory character limits enforceability; the ECI cannot disqualify candidates, and delays in complaint disposal during crucial polling phases weaken deterrence. Expanded powers also raise concerns of overreach and selective enforcement.