Jagan Mohan Reddy Calls YSRCP’s Support for 2023 Poll Law a Mistake

YSR Congress Party president and former Andhra Pradesh chief minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy has said that supporting the 2023 law governing the appointment of election commissioners was a mistake and called for a fresh, impartial system. [S1, S14-S17]

Reddy said the process for appointing election commissioners must be independent of the government in power, arguing that the credibility of elections depends on public confidence in the system.

He also sought changes in the appointment of state election commissioners, saying that chief ministers and ruling governments should not control the selection process. [S3, S19-S20]

Reddy calls support for 2023 law a mistake

Reddy made the remarks while addressing a press conference at the YSRCP central office in Tadepalli.

He said YSRCP had earlier supported the process introduced through the 2023 amendment relating to the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and other election commissioners. [S15-S17]

Reddy now says that support should not have been given. [S10, S16-S17]

“We regret supporting it today. We made a mistake,” Reddy said while referring to the party’s earlier position.

The 2023 law provides for a selection committee comprising the prime minister, a Union cabinet minister nominated by the prime minister and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha.

The Chief Justice of India was part of the earlier selection arrangement but was removed from the committee under the new law. [S16-S18]

Reddy has demanded that the earlier system be brought back, with the prime minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief Justice of India included in the selection process.

He said the ruling side should not receive a decisive advantage in appointing officials responsible for conducting elections.

His objection is directed at the structure of the appointment process rather than at the personal integrity of any particular election commissioner.

Reddy said that even an honest election commissioner could face questions about impartiality if the appointment was not made through a fair institution or procedure.

He argued that the role of the government in the existing arrangement was a weakness that needed to be corrected.

“An examiner cannot be appointed by the student”

Reddy compared the appointment of election commissioners with the relationship between an examiner and a student.

“An examiner cannot be appointed by the student,” he said.

He used the comparison to argue that the government conducting elections should not have control over the appointment of the officials responsible for overseeing them. [S3, S16-S17]

Reddy said the appointment procedure must be impartial even when the person selected is considered honest.

According to his argument, a fair process is necessary not only to ensure the appointment of capable officials but also to protect confidence in their decisions. [S2-S3]

He said the election system needs to be reconsidered to maintain people’s trust in elections.

The demand therefore covers both the composition of the selection committee and the broader principle of independence from the government in power. [S2-S3, S16-S18]

Reddy also criticised the removal of the Chief Justice of India from the selection committee formed under the 2023 law. [S16-S18]

His preferred arrangement would restore the Chief Justice of India to the panel alongside the prime minister and the Leader of the Opposition.

The issue has become part of Reddy’s wider criticism of the way election institutions are appointed and operate. [S2-S4]

Demand for changes in state election commission

Reddy has extended the same argument to the appointment of state election commissioners. [S3, S19-S20]

He said a state election commissioner should not be appointed through the chief minister or the ruling government.

Instead, he called for an impartial arrangement for making such appointments. [S3-S4]

“The state election commission should not be appointed by the chief minister or the ruling government,” Reddy said.

He said the appointment should be made by an impartial person.

Reddy’s stated concern is that a chief minister or a government in power should not control the authority overseeing elections in the state. [S3-S4, S20]

He has presented the central and state-level appointment questions as part of the same issue: the need to prevent the ruling side from gaining control over an institution responsible for conducting elections.

The demand comes while Andhra Pradesh is going through the process for local body elections.

Allegations over Andhra local body elections

At the Tadepalli press conference, Reddy also made serious allegations against the TDP-led NDA government in Andhra Pradesh in connection with local body elections.

He alleged that opposition candidates were being prevented from filing nominations through attacks, threats and the use of the police machinery.

Reddy alleged that nomination papers belonging to YSRCP candidates were snatched.

He also alleged that party workers had been attacked, abducted and threatened.

His allegations included incidents of arson and the filing of false cases against opposition workers.

Reddy specifically named Kadapa, Punganur and Tirupati while alleging that YSRCP workers were stopped from filing nominations.

The source reports do not contain an immediate response from the ruling TDP to these allegations.

Reddy also alleged that police in Pulivendula were working in favour of the TDP.

He said stone-pelting and aerial firing were used to intimidate candidates who had gone to file their nominations.

These claims were made by Reddy in the context of his criticism of the local election process and the conduct of the state administration. [S4-S6]

He alleged that the police and officials had failed to ensure a level playing field for all candidates. [S20-S21]

The allegation was not limited to the filing of nominations, but also extended to the broader role of the state election machinery during the election process. [S20-S21]

Reddy said the state government was benefiting from what he described as the state election commission’s coordination with it. [S11-S12]

A YSRCP leader told The Indian Express that the party supported the NDA on the basis of individual issues, but believed that the public needed greater assurances from the government on this matter.

The same leader said YSRCP, as the opposition party in Andhra Pradesh, believed it should support those protecting the interests of people whose votes had allegedly been illegally deleted.

The allegation about votes and the voter list forms another part of Reddy’s criticism of the election process.

Questions over election schedule and voter list

Reddy also questioned the election programme and the electoral roll.

He alleged that the election schedule was announced one day after the information on reservations was released.

According to Reddy, this left opposition parties with less time to prepare.

He further claimed that elections were being conducted without a revised voter list despite the identification of 46 lakh fake voters in the Special Intensive Revision, or SIR.

The claim about 46 lakh voters was made by Reddy and is presented in the source as his allegation.

The available reports do not provide a response from the Election Commission to this specific claim.

The announced schedule covers several categories of local elections in Andhra Pradesh.

Elections to 100 urban local bodies are scheduled for 28 October, with the results to be declared on 30 October.

The MPTC and ZPTC elections are scheduled for 3 November, while counting is scheduled for 5 November.

Gram panchayat elections are scheduled to be held in three phases on 26 November, 29 November and 2 December.

The results for the gram panchayat elections will be declared on the day of each phase.

Reddy’s criticism links the election calendar, the reservation information and the voter list to the question of whether political parties and candidates are receiving equal opportunity. [S6, S20-S21]

He has argued that a process cannot be considered fair merely because an election commissioner or another official may personally be honest.

In his view, the procedure through which officials are appointed and the conditions under which candidates participate are both relevant to public confidence in elections. [S2-S3, S20-S21]

Change in stance amid dispute over Election Commission

The controversy has also been reported in the context of protests against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

According to an ABP report, the CJP has been protesting against Kumar. [S8-S9]

The report said CJP leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka were arrested by Delhi Police and were in judicial custody.

The opposition was protesting against those arrests, according to the report.

The same report said Reddy’s position had changed after he had supported the NDA government in Parliament.

It described his expression of regret over the Election Commission-related decision as support for the CJP’s position.

The report also said that his support could be linked to coordination with Left parties, although no official statement confirming such an arrangement had been made.

That possible political explanation therefore remains unconfirmed in the material available.

What is directly stated is that Reddy has expressed regret over the appointment process and has demanded changes to the law. [S10-S11, S15-S17]

Reddy said the selection committee should be changed to include the Chief Justice of India. [S10-S11]

His position is also consistent with the demand made at the Tadepalli press conference for a selection process independent of the government in power. [S1-S4]

YSRCP’s stated position on NDA support

The remarks have raised questions about how Reddy’s position on election-related issues fits with his support for the NDA on other matters. [S9-S11]

An ABP report said Reddy had supported the NDA government in Parliament but was now expressing regret over the relevant decision concerning the Election Commission.

A YSRCP leader told The Indian Express that the party’s support for the NDA was based on issues rather than being unconditional.

The leader said the party believed that, on this issue, it should stand with those seeking to protect people whose votes had allegedly been deleted through illegal means.

The same leader alleged that the TDP government in Andhra Pradesh was taking advantage of the state election commission’s alleged coordination with it.

That allegation, like Reddy’s claims about attacks, threats and nomination papers, has been attributed to the YSRCP side. [S5, S11-S12, S20-S21]

The source reports do not include an immediate response from the TDP to the allegations concerning the local elections.

They also do not contain an official confirmation of any formal political arrangement between Reddy and Left parties.

The argument Reddy is making

Reddy’s central argument is that the authority conducting elections must not be appointed through a process that gives the ruling government decisive influence. [S2-S3, S16-S17]

He has applied that argument to the appointment of the central election commissioners as well as to the appointment of the state election commissioner. [S3-S4, S19-S20]

For the central panel, he wants the earlier arrangement involving the prime minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief Justice of India to return.

For the state commission, he wants the chief minister and the ruling government removed from control over the appointment process.

He has connected these institutional demands to the need to maintain public trust in elections.

He has also connected them to the treatment of candidates, the filing of nominations, the conduct of police and officials, the timing of the election programme and the accuracy of the voter list. [S4-S6, S20-S21]

Reddy’s remarks thus combine a review of the 2023 appointment law with allegations about the ongoing local election process in Andhra Pradesh. [S1-S7, S14-S21]

The immediate political dispute includes his regret over the earlier YSRCP position, his criticism of the present appointment structure and his allegations against the TDP-led NDA government in the state. [S4-S6, S9-S12]

His repeated demand is for an election administration that is not controlled by the government whose political interests are involved in the electoral contest. [S2-S4, S16-S17, S20]

That, he argues, is necessary for the impartiality of election commissioners and for people’s confidence in the election process. [S2-S3, S17]