Election Commission lawyer quits, says his values not in sync with poll panel's current functioning

The Election Commission’s lawyer at the Supreme Court, Mohit D Ram, quit on Friday, stating that his values were not in consonance with the current functioning of the poll panel.

Ram quit just a day after the Supreme Court rejected the EC’s plea for restraining the media from reporting oral observations made by the judges during the hearing.

The EC’s plea triggered controversy although the poll panel dismissed reports about differences within itself over the move. The commission claimed that it had not sought the Supreme Court’s restriction on reporting by the media and that it had unanimously decided against doing so.

Also read — Media has freedom to report court proceedings: Supreme Court

Ram represented the EC before the Supreme Court as one of its ‘panel counsels’ since 2013. “It was an honour to represent the Election Commission of India (ECI). I had a cherishing milestone of my career, in the journey which began with being part of the office of Standing Counsel of (the) ECI and progressed as one of the panel counsels of (the) ECI (since 2013),” he wrote in an email to Vijay Kumar Pandey, the Director (Law) of the commission. “However, I have found that my values are not in consonance with the current functioning of the ECI; and hence I withdraw myself from the responsibilities of its panel counsel before the Supreme Court of India.”

The Madras High Court had on April 26 held the EC “singularly responsible” for the second wave of the Covid-19 in the country as it had failed to enforce safety protocols required to check the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus during electioneering. The High Court had also observed that the EC officers should probably be booked for murder.

Also read — Treat HC remarks as a 'bitter pill': SC to EC

The scathing remarks by the Chief Justice of Madras High Court, Sanjib Banerjee, however, were not mentioned in his written order. When the Madras High Court refused to stop the media from reporting oral observations of the judges, the EC moved the Supreme Court.

A bench of the Supreme Court, comprising Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice M R Shah, however, refused to expunge the critical remarks made by the Madras High Court about the EC. It also turned down the commission’s plea for the media should be restrained from reporting oral observations made by the judges during judicial proceedings. The poll panel later issued a press release stating that the commission recognised the positive role of the media. “The commission as a whole and each one of its members recognise the positive role played by the media in the conduct of all elections in the past and present and in strengthening electoral democracy in the country.”

The poll panel, however, denied reports of differences within itself over the content of the affidavits it had filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the order of the Madras High Court.