1

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

2nd Interim Reportof the Panel(covering the period
17 April to
22 May 2024)

Electoral Integrity Compromised!
Election Authorities Must Change Course
to Save India’s Democracy

May 2024
indiaelectionmonitor.org

2

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Independent Panel for Monitoring
Indian Elections – 2024
2nd Interim Report(Covering the period 17 April to 22 May 2024)

Electoral Integrity Compromised! Election Authorities Must
Change Course to Save India’s Democracy

indiaelectionmonitor.org

23rd May, 2024

Cover page artwork designed by starline
and licensed for free via Freepik

3

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Executive Summary
•

•
•

•
•

We constituted ourselves as the Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections, 2024, to engage with concerns
expressed by citizens’ groups seeking to ensure free, fair and genuine General Election (GE) 2024 in India. Throughour previous in-depth reports and summary bulletins, we have sought to document trends in violations of electoral
integrity and raise concerns publicly as well as directly with the Election Commission of India (ECI), to address
those.
This, the third of our series of in-depth reports, covers much of the period since the commencement of voting, when
the focus has been on campaigning by political parties and the conduct of five ‘phases’ of polling by election
authorities.
These five weeks have been eventful, with frequent reports of political campaigning potentially violating elections
laws and codes of conduct, as well as of authorities acting to favour the ruling party at the cost of opposition
candidates. Equally, throughout, we have heard election watch groups as well as opposition parties, complaining of
the ECI refusing to act as a fair referee. These have serious implications for citizens’ right to free and fair elections,and the principle of a level playing field for contesting political parties, both the cornerstones of electoral integrity.
It is these trends we document in this report, as GE 2024 reaches its endgame, in the hope that authorities will yet
act to safeguard the integrity of the electoral process, and of democracy in India.
Below are some of the highlights from the report:
Ruling BJP’s electoral campaign relying solely on anti-minority hate and disinformation

•

•

•

•
•

Since the conclusion of Phase 1 of polling, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), led by Prime Minister Narendra
Modi, has doubled down on its incendiary sectarian rhetoric, suggesting a concerted effort to splinter andmanipulate public discourse using misinformation and fear-mongering, demonising minorities to induce fear among
the Hindu majority.
PM Modi has led the charge, directly referring to Muslims as ‘infiltrators’ and ‘those with more children’, andaccusing opposition parties of conspiring to ‘snatch’ wealth and other benefits from Hindus. Modi’s speech in
Banswara, Rajasthan – which he has repeated on multiple occasions, sometimes with direct reference to Muslims– is clearly violative of the Representation of the People Act as well as hate speech provisions of the penal code,and is grounds both for his disqualification as a candidate and the commencement of criminal proceedings against
him. The only known action election authorities have taken, however, has been in the form of a polite notice by the
ECI to the BJP’s President. Modi’s direct call to the electorate to vote on the basis of dangerous conspiracy theories
has the potential to lead to further hostility, discrimination and even violence against India’s Muslims. As such, thespeech also potentially amounts to prohibited hate speech under international law.
Some form of the same narrative continues to be brazenly parroted every day, by Modi, the rest of the BJP’s seniorleadership--including Home Minister Amit Shah, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister (CM) Yogi Adityanath, Assam CM
Himanta B Sarma - and the BJP’s social media accounts, all with the implicit approval of the ECI and other domestic
authorities. Other direct calls to vote on the basis of religion, particularly by invoking the Ram Temple, also
continue unabated.
With such a toxic and communally charged atmosphere persisting, there are serious concerns as to whether the
Indian electorate is able to make an independent and informed choice during GE 2024, free of manipulativeinterference.
Broadcast news networks have continued to adopt a highly partisan tone, devoting most of their coverage to praising
Modi and the BJP government, and to attacking the opposition. Disinformation and hateful content, including
through ‘shadow advertisers’ operating outside the purview of official ECI guidelines, are reported to be floodingsocial media networks.
Widespread reports of voter suppression concerning vulnerable groups

4

•
•

•

•

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Legacy problems that have marred previous Indian elections – such as the systematic exclusion of vulnerable
sections of the population from voter rolls, and other state-led voter suppression methods – seem to have escalated
during GE 2024.
This time round, state-led voter suppression measures against Muslims (and Dalits) were reported during each phaseof polling concluded so far–most egregiously in Uttar Pradesh, but also in Gujarat, Jammu & Kashmir, and Assam.
Polling in Manipur, and to a lesser extent Andhra Pradesh, was marked by widespread violence and vandalism.
Other irregularities, such as bogus voting and voter intimidation, were reported from across the country.
Previous state-led voter suppression measures too continued to impact the right of citizens to freely exercise theirfranchise. In Assam, nearly 100,000 residents declared ‘doubtful voters’ (D-voters)– many excluded from the
National Register of Citizens – were unable to cast votes. Assam’s recently concluded delimitation exercise, which
was overseen by the ECI, is also reported leading to the disempowerment of several groups, particularly Muslims.
And residents of Jammu & Kashmir have been denied the right to vote in legislative assembly elections, last heldin 2014.
Read together, these developments raise troubling questions as to whether India’s electoral authorities can indeed
claim that they have ensured universal and equal suffrage.
Authorities continuing to target opposition candidates, to the advantage of the ruling BJP

•

•
•
•

There is widespread accusation of the BJP ‘fixing’ elections and securing uncontested or virtually uncontested
victories in several constituencies. For eg. reports from Surat, where the BJP candidate has already been declared
the winner, and Varanasi, where Prime Minister Modi is contesting, suggest summary rejection of the candidatureof opposition candidates by the ECI. Opposition candidates in Gandhinagar, where Home Minister Amit Shah iscontesting, and in Indore, allegedly faced pressure to withdraw their candidacy.
While the interim bail granted to Aam Aadmi Party leader Arvind Kejriwal is heartening, we note that several top
leaders of various opposition parties continue to remain incarcerated on evidently trumped up charges, physically
restraining them from campaigning.
We note with concern, statements by India’s Finance Minister Nirmala Sitaraman that electoral bonds, whichallowed the BJP to corner the lion’s share of political funding and potentially engage in quid pro quo relationships
with corporate donors, would be brought back if the party returns to power.
Read together, these developments raise serious concerns as to the genuineness of GE 2024.
Election Commission of India (ECI) failing to uphold laws and codes–compromising electoral integrity. Supreme
Court of India, as yet, unable to offer redress

•
•
•

•
•
•

During GE 2024, the once-vaunted ECI has appeared to act like an arm of the government, giving free rein to BJP
leaders, while applying a different set of standards to opposition parties.
The ECI has failed to check hate speech, communal fear-mongering and misinformation by BJP leaders. At thesame time, it has acted with alacrity when it came to perceived abuses by non-BJP leaders.
The inordinate delay in releasing the voter turnout figures for initial rounds of voting, the substantial andunexplained rise in final voting percentages compared to previously announced provisional figures, and thecontinued refusal to divulge the absolute number of votes cast so far have all deepened apprehensions among
citizens about the possibility of manipulation of results at the time of counting.
The ECI has also refused to engage meaningfully and in good faith with all stakeholders, including opposition
parties and civil society. Its official grievance redressal mechanisms have remained largely non-functional andinaccessible to ordinary citizens.
Read together, the ECI appears to be dismally failing in its constitutional duty to ensure a level playing field.
The Supreme Court helped the cause of electoral integrity, by ruling, just ahead of commencement of elections,that the electoral bond scheme was unconstitutional. But it has since failed to meet citizens’ raised expectations ofa protector of democracy. It recently dismissed pleas seeking 100% cross-verification between Electronic Voting

5

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Machines (EVMs) and Voter-Verified Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs) nation-wide, striking a blow at efforts topreserve public’s trust in the voting process. Recently, rather than order ECI to immediately release voter turnout
data, it has given the poll panel extended time to respond, even as the voting process grinds towards conclusion. It
had earlier dismissed a bunch of petitions seeking directions to ECI to address hate speeches by PM Modi and other
BJP leaders on the campaign trail.
Call to Action• Free and fair elections form the cornerstone of democracy. We see none of the pre-conditions for free and fairelections, appearing to be met. This is leading to great disquiet among citizens, also reinforcing fears that, comecounting day, their vote risks being stolen.
• Time is running out. But the Election Commission of India can still salvage the integrity of the electoral process,and safeguard legitimacy of the government that will be formed.
• ECI must act now to enforce laws, codes and procedures fairly, engage transparently with all stakeholders, addressderelictions brought to its attention, and penalize wrongdoers, high or low.

6

List of Abbreviations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

AAP: Aam Aadmi Party
BJP: Bharatiya Janata Party
BRS: Bharat Rashtra Samithi
CAA: Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019
CBI: Central Bureau of Investigations
CCE: Citizens Commission for Elections
CEC: Chief Election Commissioner
CM: Chief Minister
CPI-M: Communist Party of India (Marxist)
D-Voter: Doubtful Voter
DMK: Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam
ECI: Election Commission of India
ED: Enforcement Directorate
EMB: Electoral Management Bodies
EVM: Electronic Voting Machines
FCRA: Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act
FIR: First Information Report
FPTP: First Past the Post
GE: General Election
ICCPR: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
INC: Indian National Congress
INDIA alliance: Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance
J&K: Jammu & Kashmir
MCC: Model Code of Conduct
MEIL: Megha Engineering and Infrastructure Limited
MLA: Member of Legislative Assembly
MP: Member of Parliament
NDTV: New Delhi Television
NRC: National Register of Citizens
PM: Prime Minister
RPA: The Representation of the People Act
RSS: Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh
SCI: Supreme Court of India
SC: Scheduled Caste
SP: Samajwadi Party
ST: Scheduled Tribe
TMC: Trinamool Congress
UN: United Nations
UP: Uttar Pradesh
UT: Union Territory
VHP: Vishwa Hindu Parishad
VVPAT: Voter Verified Paper and Audit Trail

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

7

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections – 2024
The members of the Panel are:
1. Prof. Neera Chandhoke, Distinguished Honorary Fellow, Centre for Equity Studies, andretd. Professor, Delhi University, India
2. Dr. Thomas Daffern, Philosopher and historian; chairman of World Intellectuals Wisdom
Forum; Director, International Institute of Peace Studies and Global Philosophy (France andUK); Convenor, Commonwealth Interfaith Network
3. Mr. Sakhawat Hossain, former Election Commissioner of Bangladesh
4. Dr. Harish Karnick, former Professor, IIT, Kanpur, India
5. Dr. Sebastian Morris, former Professor, IIM, Ahmedabad, India
6. Prof. Rahul Mukherji, Professor & Chair, Modern Politics of South Asia, South Asia
Institute, Heidelberg University, Germany

8

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Table of Contents
Executive Summary
List of Abbreviations
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections – 2024

3
6
7

1.
2.

9
11

Introduction
Does India have universal suffrage?

2.1.

Potential restrictions on the right to vote during GE 2024
Potential voter suppression tactics targeting Muslim voters in UP (19 April)
Potential voter suppression tactics targeting Muslims in UP and Assam (26 April)
Police violence against Muslim voters in Sambhal (UP) (7 May)
700+ Muslim fishermen deleted from voter rolls in Gujarat (7 May)
Mass detentions and allegations of ‘vote fixing’ in Kashmir (13 May)
2.2.
Other polling-day violations potentially impacting the right to vote2.2.1.
Widespread vandalism, violence, and voter intimidation in Manipur (19 April)
2.2.2.
Casting of bogus votes by BJP workers in Gujarat (7 May) and Uttar Pradesh (13 May)
2.2.3.
Intimidation of Muslim women voters by BJP candidate in Hyderabad (7 May)
2.2.4.
Polling-day and post-poll violence across Andhra Pradesh (13 May)
2.3.
Continuing impacts of previous voter suppression methods in Assam
2.3.1.
Impacts of attempts to disenfranchise ‘illegal migrants’
2.3.2.
Impacts of recent delimitation, disadvantaging Muslims
2.1.1.
2.1.2.
2.1.3.
2.1.4.
2.1.5.

12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
17
17
18
18
18

3. Do Indian voters have a ‘real choice’?
3.1.
Allegations of BJP ‘fixing’ elections by intimidating opposition candidates
3.2.
Continuing incarceration of senior opposition leaders
3.3.
Electoral Bonds to monopolise political space
3.4.
Continuing accusations against the EVM-VVPAT system

20
20
21
22
23

4.
Are Indian voters able to make an ‘informed choice’?
4.1.
Introduction
4.2.
Communal polarisation as electoral strategy
4.2.1.
Communal fear-mongering and misinformation by Prime Minister Modi
4.2.1.1. PM Modi’s speech in Banswara on 21 April, 2024
4.2.1.2. Other false and communal statements by PM Modi
4.2.2.
Communal fear-mongering and misinformation by other senior BJP leaders and channels
4.2.3.
Continuing anti-minority incitement by other Hindu nationalist leaders
4.3.
A partisan broadcast media, exacerbating the problem
4.4.
Hate speech and misinformation on online platforms

24
24
25
26
26
27
29
30
31
31

5.
Is the Election Commission of India independent and objective?
33
5.1.
Introduction
33
5.2.
Inordinate delay in release of voter turnout figures34
5.3.
Potential collaboration with BJP in facilitating foreign observers; refusal to engage with civil society 35
5.4.
Skewing the electoral playing field in favour of the BJP
36
6.

Conclusion and Call to Action

Annexure #1: Case study and data from Rampur parliamentary constituency
Annexure #2: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 4 (11 April – 17 April, 2024)
Annexure #3: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 5 (18 April – 24 April, 2024)
Annexure #4: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 6 (25 April – 1 May, 2024)
Annexure #5: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 7 (2 - 8 May, 2024)
Annexure #6: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 8 (9 - 15 May, 2024)
Annexure #7: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 9 (16 - 22 May, 2024)

39
41
43
44
46
48
50
52

9

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

1. Introduction
We constituted ourselves as the Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (IPMIE) –2024, to engage with the concerns expressed by citizens’ groups seeking to ensure a free, fair andgenuine General Election (GE) 2024 in India. Through our previous in-depth reports and summary
bulletins, we have sought to document trends in violations of electoral integrity, make assessments,
and raise concerns publicly as well as directly with the Election Commission of India (ECI), toaddress those.
Our first report was released on 15 March, just ahead of the formal announcement of GE 2024 by
the ECI, providing a baseline for how we planned to observe the election. This was based on
conceptual understanding of electoral integrity, drawing on domestic legal framework and India’s
relevant international obligations, with data and insights drawn from 2019 general elections andstate assembly elections since.
Our second report, released on 17 April, just before the commencement of polling, covered mostly
the campaigning period, reporting on preparedness of election authorities, and campaigning bypolitical parties, as well as a review of actions by state authorities with a bearing on free andfairness of the upcoming polls. That report highlighted our growing concerns about the direction
we saw GE 2024 going in – providing early warning signs. We highlighted particularly thefollowing patterns:-

the targeting of opposition political parties, by authorities’ misuse of the justice system –through false cases, and arrest of detention of candidates.
ruling BJP’s attempt at monopolising the political space through the use of electoral bonds
its deriving electoral advantage by misusing executive authority, including misuse ofgovernment resources and infrastructure, not available to the opposition.
the simmering trend of especially BJP leaders’ pandering to communal sentiments, forelectoral advantage.
and we found the Election Commission of India, woefully inadequate, in its actions andengagements with stakeholders, to ensure effective electoral management and redress.

This, the third of our series of in-depth reports, covers the period since the commencement ofvoting, on 19 April, when the focus has been on campaigning by political parties and the conductof five ‘phases’ of polling by election authorities. The worrisome trends we highlighted in our
second report, have only accelerated in this time.

10

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

The five weeks that form the scope of this current report, have been eventful, with frequent reports
of political campaigning potentially violating elections laws and codes of conduct, as well as ofauthorities acting to favour the ruling party at the cost of opposition candidates. Equally,
throughout, we have heard election watch groups as well as opposition parties, complaining of theElection Commission of India refusing to act as a fair referee. These have serious implications for
citizens’ right to free and fair elections, and the principle of a level playing field for contesting
political parties, both cornerstones of electoral integrity.
As the 2024 General Election reaches its final stages, citizens’ groups are increasingly expressing
their disquiet, at election authorities failing to do their job independently. They are now also
expressing fears that final stage – counting of votes – might be compromised, and that could result
ultimately in their vote being stolen. As we publish our 2nd Interim Report, we hope that authorities,
and Election Commission of India particularly, will yet act decisively to save the day – to safeguard
the integrity of the electoral process and of India’s cherished democracy.
In the following pages, we document these trends, using our conceptual framework of electoral
integrity ultimately being about a set of rights, including the right to universal suffrage, the rightto have a ‘real choice’ and the right to ‘informed choice’. The report is structured accordingly.
Election authorities’ unwillingness to be transparent and engage effectively with citizens groups –a trend we see being reinforced as GE 2024 has progressed – has prevented our attempt at sourcing
official data for conducting our analysis. They have also not responded to Right to Information
requests by citizens. And the lack of civil society capacity, especially at the constituency and booth
levels, has put paid to any efforts at collecting alternative systematic data from the ground. Hence
we have had to limit our sources of data on media reports, of which there is much. Alongside wealso attempt, partially, to provide a short case study, of violations in a single constituency, basedon an independent candidate’s papers and communications, that they were kind enough to makeavailable to the panel.

11

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

2. Does India have universal suffrage?
Universal suffrage is the principle that the broadest reasonable pool of voters must be guaranteed
the right to vote, without discrimination.1 Equal suffrage is the idea usually expressed as ‘one
person, one vote’.2
Any conditions that are applied to these internationally protected rights must be based on‘objective’ and ‘reasonable’ criteria.3 States are required to take effective measures to ensure that
all entitled persons can exercise their right to vote, including by facilitating and removing obstacles
to the registration of voters.4 Delimitation, the drawing of electoral boundaries, must not distortthe distribution of voters, discriminate against any group, and must take into account a range offactors including, inter alia, available census data, territorial integrity, geographical distribution,and topography.5
In our Baseline Report, we had highlighted several legacy problems that have marred universal
suffrage in previous Indian elections, including the systematic exclusion of several vulnerable
sections of the population from electoral rolls, particularly Muslims, Dalits, and Christians, as wellas groups such as migrant voters and the homeless.6 We had also highlighted historical voter
suppression tactics that have resulted in the mass disenfranchisement of Bengali-speaking
residents of Assam, and warned that recently-concluded delimitation exercises in Assam andJammu & Kashmir may amount to gerrymandering, particularly disadvantaging Muslims evenfurther.7
We are dismayed to note that these problems have continued, and indeed escalated, during theongoing General Election. Despite the Election Commission’s claim that the GE has so far been
‘violence free, less noisy, less cluttered and intrusive, free of inducement and ostentatiousness’8,
ach of the four phases of polling concluded so far has been marked by reports of voter suppression
by state authorities, particularly against Muslims. Polling in Manipur – and to a lesser extent,
Andhra Pradesh – was marked by widespread violence and vandalism by non-state actors, whileother irregularities were reported from across the country. Additionally, the impacts of previous
1

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Human Rights and Elections: A Handbook on International Human Rights
Standards on Elections’ (United Nations 2021) No. 2/Rev.1 paras 90–91.
2
ibid.
3
UN Human Rights Committee, ‘General Comment No. 25: The Right to Participate in Public Affairs, Voting Rights and the Rightof Equal Access to Public Service’ (1996) CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7 para 4.
4
ibid 11.
5
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (n 1) paras 117–118.
6
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections, ‘Baseline Report Ahead of the 2024 General Election’ (2024) 16<https://indiaelectionmonitor.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/ipmie-final.pdf>.
7
ibid 21.
8
Election Commission of India, ‘Commission’s Second Suo Motu Report on Two Month’s Enforcement of MCC during GE 2024’(New Delhi, 14 May 2024) <https://pib.gov.in/pib.gov.in/Pressreleaseshare.aspx?PRID=2020576> accessed 21 May 2024.

12

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

state-imposed voter suppression measures in Assam continued to have impacts during the ongoing
General Election, and the residents of Jammu & Kashmir continued to be denied the right to votein legislative assembly elections.
Read together, these developments raise troubling questions as to whether India’s electoral
authorities can indeed claim that they have ensured universal suffrage.

2.1. Potential restrictions on the right to vote during GE 2024
2.1.1. Potential voter suppression tactics targeting Muslim voters in UP (19April)
During the first phase of polling, the Samajwadi Party, the principal opposition party in Uttar
Pradesh, made serious of allegations regarding voting irregularities disadvantaging its voters,
particularly Muslims. The allegations included:••••

Claims that people were prevented by authorities from casting their vote, at one pollingbooth in Muzaffarnagar.9
Claims that Muslim voters were harassed at three polling booths in Nagina constituency.10
Claims that SP voters were prevented by authorities from casting their vote, at one pollingbooth in Moradabad.11
Claims that SP voters were pressured by the presiding officer to vote for another party, at
one polling booth in Rampur.12

It is not known if the ECI has initiated action in any of these cases. No re-polls have been reported.

SamajwadiParty[@samajwadiparty],‘मुज$रनगरलोकसभाकेमुज$रनगरम/बूथसं4ा
60
पर6शासन8ारामतदानकरनेसेरोकाजारहा।चुनावआयोगसंAानल/ , िनCDमतदानसुिनिEतहो। @ecisveep @ceoup @DmMuzaffarnagar’<https://twitter.com/samajwadiparty/status/1781286287938597366> accessed 16 May 2024.
10
SamajwadiParty[@samajwadiparty],‘नगीनालोकसभाकेनजीबाबादकेबूथसं4ा
139,140,141
परमुGHममतदाताओंकोपरे शानिकयाजारहाहै ।6शासन8ाराधीमीगितसेमतदानकरायाजारहाहै ।चुनावआयोगसंAानल/ ,िनCDमतदानसुिनिEतहो। @ecisveep @ceoup @dmbijnor’ <https://twitter.com/samajwadiparty/status/1781282797921112107>
accessed 16 May 2024.
11
SamajwadiParty[@samajwadiparty],‘मुरादाबादकेठाकुर8ाराम/बूथसं4ा
26
पर6शासन8ारामतदाताओंकोवोटडालनेसेरोकाजारहा।चुनावआयोगसंAानल/ ,िनCDमतदानसुिनिEतहो।@ecisveep@ceoup@DMMoradabad’ <https://twitter.com/samajwadiparty/status/1781284807793905754> accessed 16 May 2024.
12
SamajwadiParty[@samajwadiparty],‘रामपुरलोकसभाकेOारम/बूथसं4ा
202परपीठासीनअिधकारी8ाराजबरनसपासमथQकोंसेदूसरे दलकोवोटदे नेकेिलएदबावबनायाजारहा।चुनावआयोगसंAानल/ ,िनCDमतदानसुिनिEतहो। @ecisveep @ceoup @RampurDm’ <https://twitter.com/samajwadiparty/status/1781283586068684827>
accessed 16 May 2024.
913

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

2.1.2. Potential voter suppression tactics targeting Muslims in UP and Assam (26April)•

Muslim voters in Mathura (UP) were unable to vote for various reasons: A news report
revealed that dozens of Muslim voters in the Mathura parliamentary constituency in Uttar
Pradesh were unable to vote for a variety of reasons, such as missing or misspelt names inthe electoral rolls at polling stations, the failure of electoral authorities to distribute voter
slips in Muslim-concentration areas, and other hurdles in getting voter IDs issued.13 It isnoteworthy that the constituency is reported to have recorded its lowest General Election
turnout in two decades, and that such systemic exclusions were not reported from Hinduconcentration localities within the constituency.14•

Muslim migrant workers unable to cast votes in Assam after train cancellations: A news
report revealed that hundreds of train passengers, most of whom were Muslim migrant
workers, were unable to cast their votes in Karimganj parliamentary constituency inAssam, after the trains scheduled to transport them were cancelled.15 Railway authorities
clarified that the cancellations occurred due to a derailment.16

2.1.3. Police violence against Muslim voters in Sambhal (UP) (7 May)
During the third phase of polling, dozens of Muslim voters in at least four Muslim-concentrationvillages in the Sambhal parliamentary constituency in Uttar Pradesh alleged that they were
violently assaulted and chased away by police personnel as they were attempting to cast theirvotes.17
Accounts of violent assaults by a group of 30-40 policemen were reported from Ovari,
Mansoorpur, Shahbazpur and Mubarakpur villages, where the police were accused of storming
polling centres, snatching ID cards and voting slips from Muslim voters, and assaulting them withbatons and sticks.18 The police action against voters in Ovari was caught on camera.19

13

Ayush Tiwari, ‘In Mathura, Muslims Say They Were Denied Their Vote. No Complaints in Hindu Areas’ Scroll.in (30 April
2024)<https://scroll.in/article/1067215/in-mathura-muslims-say-they-were-denied-their-vote-no-complaints-in-hindu-areas>
accessed 17 May 2024.
14
ibid.
15
Rokibuz Zaman, ‘Assam: Hundreds of Voters Stranded after Six Trains Cancelled’ Scroll.in (26 April 2024)<https://scroll.in/latest/1067089/assam-thousands-of-voters-stranded-after-six-trains-cancelled> accessed 17 May 2024.
16
ibid.
17
Ayush Tiwari, ‘Sambhal: Muslims Allege UP Police Stormed Booths, Snatched IDs and Beat up Voters on Polling Day’ Scroll.in(10 May 2024) <https://scroll.in/article/1067693/in-sambhal-muslims-allege-up-police-stormed-booths-snatched-ids-and-beat-upvoters-on-polling-day> accessed 16 May 2024.
18
ibid.
19
ibid.

14

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Among those injured were several women, as well as Dalits.20 Also among those who werereportedly denied the right to vote was Zia-ur-Rehman, the candidate of the opposition Samajwadi
Party.21
Police authorities made counter-claims that they had caught more than 50 ‘suspicious persons’
while trying to cast ‘fake votes’.22 Reporters confirmed that such police actions were not reported
from nearby Hindu-concentration villages.23

2.1.4. 700+ Muslim fishermen deleted from voter rolls in Gujarat (7 May)
During the third phase of polling, news reports revealed that over 700 Muslim fishermen in the
harbours of Gandhvi and Navadra in Gujarat were barred from casting their votes after their names
were deleted from the latest electoral rolls.24
The fishermen’s homes had been demolished by local authorities in several targeted demolition
drives since October 2022, over claims that they were ‘illegally built’ on government land.25
The ECI claimed that it had followed due process while deleting the names.26

2.1.5. Mass detentions and allegations of ‘vote fixing’ in Kashmir (13 May)
Ahead of the fourth phase of polling on 13 May, police authorities in Jammu & Kashmir were
alleged to have detained an unknown number of individuals in Srinagar.27
Both main political parties in the region–the National Conference (NC) and the People’s
Democratic Party (PDP)–alleged that the detainees included their party workers and activists, and

20

ibid.
‘Muslims in UP’s Sambhal “not Allowed” to Cast Vote, Thrashed by Cops’ The Siasat Daily (7 May 2024)<https://www.siasat.com/muslims-in-ups-sambhal-not-allowed-to-cast-vote-thrashed-by-cops-3022057/> accessed 17 May 2024.
22
ibid.
23
Ayush Tiwari, ‘Sambhal: Muslims Allege UP Police Stormed Booths, Snatched IDs and Beat up Voters on Polling Day’ (n 17).
24
Gopal B. Kateshiya, ‘Gujarat: After Their Houses Were Razed, Names of 700 Fishermen Deleted from Voters’ Lists’ The Indian
Express (7 May 2024) <https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/ahmedabad/after-their-houses-were-razed-names-of-700fishermen-deleted-from-voters-lists-9312406/> accessed 17 May 2024.
25
Sabah Gurmat, ‘Homes Demolished, the Right to Fish Denied: The Lives of Gujarat’s Muslim Fishermen’ The Wire (10September 2023) <https://thewire.in/rights/homes-demolished-the-right-to-fish-denied-the-lives-of-gujarats-muslim-fishermen>
accessed 17 May 2024.
26‘CEO on “Removal” of 700 Muslims from Voting List: Electors Could Have Raised Objection Any Time’ The Indian Express(8 May 2024) <https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/ahmedabad/ceo-on-removal-of-700-muslims-from-voting-list-electorscould-have-raised-objection-any-time-9314776/> accessed 17 May 2024.
27‘J&K Police Trigger “Fixing” Allegations By Detaining People Ahead of Srinagar Polling’ The Wire (13 May 2024)<https://thewire.in/politics/jk-police-trigger-fixing-allegations-by-detaining-people-ahead-of-srinagar-polling> accessed 17 May
2024.
21

15

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

that authorities were engaging in attempts to ‘fix the election’.28 A PDP leader directly accused asenior police officer of ‘allegedly directing officials to minimise voter turnout by detaining,harassing workers.’29
Police authorities acknowledged the detentions, but claimed that the detainees were ‘miscreants
and potential offenders with a background of linkages to terrorism and separatism.’ They haverefused to divulge the total number of detainees.
The NC has further alleged that police authorities have revoked previously granted permission toorganise public rallies ahead of the fifth phase of polling, scheduled for 20 May.30
While the BJP is not contesting from any of J&K’s five parliamentary seats during the ongoing
General Election, it is noteworthy that none of the candidates it is known to be tacitly supporting
have reported facing any police action.31

2.2. Other polling-day violations potentially impacting the right tovote
2.2.1. Widespread vandalism, violence, and voter intimidation in Manipur (19April)
Polling in Manipur’s two parliamentary constituencies, conducted over the first two phases, wasmarked by widespread reports of vandalism, violence, and voter intimidation.32
At least three injuries were reported after unidentified men opened fire at two separate polling
stations in Imphal on 19 April.33 Firing was also reported from at least two other polling stations,also in Imphal, albeit not resulting in injuries.34 In a polling booth in Khaidem (Imphal), a groupof voters were seen on video destroying an Electronic Voting Machine (EVM), alleging that armed
militants had voted by proxy on behalf of around 100 voters.35 There were at least five otherinstances of EVMs being destroyed, in different polling station across Imphal.36
28

ibid.
‘EC Under Spotlight in J&K Again as National Conference Says Police Unfairly Cancelled Rallies’ The Wire (10 May 2024)<https://thewire.in/politics/ec-under-spotlight-in-jk-again-as-national-conference-says-police-unfairly-cancelled-rallies> accessed
17 May 2024.
30
ibid.
31
ibid.
32
Debanish Achom and Ratnadip Choudhury, ‘Gunfire, EVMs Destroyed, Anger In Crisis-Hit Manipur Amid Chaotic Voting’
NDTV.com (Imphal, 19 April 2024) <https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/lok-sabha-elections-2024-gunfire-evms-destroyed-angerin-crisis-hit-manipur-amid-chaotic-voting-5478201> accessed 16 May 2024.
33
ibid.
34
ibid.
35
ibid.
36
ibid.
29

16

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Witnesses accused the Arambai Tenggol, an armed Meitei nationalist group, of being behind theviolence.37
The ECI ordered re-polling in 11 polling booths.38
Since May 2023, Manipur has been rocked by violence between members of the predominantlyHindu Meitei community and the predominantly-Christian Kuki-Zo tribes, resulting in over 215
deaths, and the forced displacement of over 50,000 people.39 The BJP-led state government in
Manipur has been accused of giving a ‘free hand’ to the Arambai Tenggol, and of being openly
hostile towards the Kukis, who have accounted for the bulk of the casualties.40

2.2.2. Casting of bogus votes by BJP workers in Gujarat (7 May) and Uttar
Pradesh (13 May)
During the third phase of polling, two BJP workers in Dahod constituency (Mahisagar district) in
Gujarat live-streamed themselves casting bogus votes – and dancing with an EVM.41
Local workers of the opposition Congress Party alleged that the two BJP men, who were later
arrested, had engaged in similar bogus voting in at least 25 other polling booths.
The ECI ordered re-polling only in the booths from which the men had live-streamed themselves.42
In a similar incident, reported from Farrukhabad constituency in UP, the 17-year-old son of a BJP
worker was reported to have recorded himself casting his vote for the local BJP candidate aroundeight times.43 The accused has reportedly been detained, and the ECI has recommended re-pollingin the constituency.

37

Saptarshi Basak, ‘EC Orders Repoll in 11 Stations but so Does Arambai Tenggol’ The Quint (21 April 2024)<https://www.thequint.com/news/india/manipur-violence-ec-orders-repoll-in-11-stations-but-so-does-arambai-tenggol> accessed
17 May 2024.
38
ibid.
39
Krishn Kaushik and YP Rajesh, ‘Manipur: Ethnic Violence in the Indian State Explained’ Reuters (21 July 2023)<https://www.reuters.com/world/india/why-is-indias-manipur-state-grip-ethnic-violence-2023-07-21/> accessed 17 August 2023.
40
Greeshma Kuthar, ‘Why the Biren Singh Government Gives a Free Hand to Arambai Tenggol in Imphal, Manipur’ The Caravan(15 April 2024) <https://caravanmagazine.in/conflict/biren-singh-gives-a-free-hand-to-arambai-tenggol-militia-imphal-manipur>
accessed 17 May 2024; Kaushik and Rajesh (n 39).
41
Aditi Raja, ‘Two BJP Men Held in Gujarat for Casting Bogus Vote and Live-Streaming It on Facebook’ The Indian Express(Ahmedabad, 9 May 2024) <https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/ahmedabad/two-bjp-men-held-gujarat-casting-bogus-votelive-streaming-facebook-9316655/> accessed 16 May 2024.
42
ibid.
43
‘Village Pradhan’s Teen Son Casts Fake Votes In UP’s Farrukhabad, Detained’ (NDTV.com, 20 May 2024)<https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/village-pradhan-teen-son-casts-fake-votes-in-up-farrukhabad-detained-5704850> accessed 21
May 2024.

17

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

2.2.3. Intimidation of Muslim women voters by BJP candidate in Hyderabad (7May)
During the third phase of voting, Madhavi Latha, the BJP’s candidate in the Hyderabad
constituency, was seen on video forcing Muslim women voters in a polling booth to take off theirveils, purportedly to check their identity.44
Latha claimed, wrongly, that as a candidate she had the right to check voters’ ID cards.45
An FIR has reportedly been registered against her, for engaging in misconduct at a polling station,
which is violative of Section 132 of the Representation of the People Act.46
Previously, Latha had courted controversy after she was caught on video during a public rally
aiming an imaginary arrow in the direction of a nearby mosque.47 An FIR had been registeredagainst her in connection with that incident as well.48

2.2.4. Polling-day and post-poll violence across Andhra Pradesh (13 May)
The third phase of polling was marked by multiple instances of violence across Andhra Pradesh,which witnessed simultaneous elections to both the Lok Sabha and the state Assembly.49
On polling day (13 May), there were reports of EVMs being destroyed in Mancherla (Palnadu
district), as well as reports of vandalism and arson across the state, resulting in injuries to a
candidate of the Telugu Desam Party (TDP).50 Violent clashes between supporters of the rulingYSR Congress Party and of the TDP continued to be reported in subsequent days.51
The ECI was reported to have summoned the state’s Chief Secretary and Director-General of
Police (DGP) to ‘personally explain’ the state machinery’s failure to contain the violence.52
44‘BJP Hyderabad Candidate Makes Muslim Voters Take off Veil to Check Identity, Booked for “Misconduct”’ Scroll.in (13 May
2024)<https://scroll.in/latest/1067800/bjp-hyderabad-candidate-madhavi-latha-booked-for-misconduct-at-polling-station>accessed 16 May 2024.
45
ibid.
46
ibid.
47
‘Case against BJP’s Hyderabad Candidate for Directing Imaginary Arrow at Mosque’ India Today (21 April 2024)<https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/fir-bjp-hyderabad-candidate-madhavi-latha-directing-imaginary-arrow-at-mosque2529919-2024-04-21> accessed 17 May 2024.
48‘BJP Hyderabad Candidate Makes Muslim Voters Take off Veil to Check Identity, Booked for “Misconduct”’ (n 44).
49
‘Top Andhra Officials Must “Personally Explain” Poll Violence: Poll Body’ NDTV.com (15 May 2024)<https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/andhra-pradesh-post-poll-violence-election-commission-top-andhra-pradesh-officials-topersonally-explain-post-poll-violence-5668667> accessed 16 May 2024.
50
ibid.
51
ibid.
52
ibid.

18

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

2.3. Continuing impacts of previous voter suppression methods in
Assam
2.3.1. Impacts of attempts to disenfranchise ‘illegal migrants’
Close to 100,000 Assam residents who have been declared as ‘doubtful voters’ (D-voters) by theElection Commission of India (ECI) over the past decades will continue to be denied the right tovote during the ongoing General Election.53 Designation as ‘doubtful voters’–and subsequentdenial of voting rights–by the ECI is one of several state-led efforts to target and penalise alleged
illegal migrants in Assam.
In August 2019, the National Register of Citizens (NRC) had been published in Assam, as theculmination of a separate, multi-year administrative exercise to identify ‘genuine’ Indian citizens
and exclude ‘illegal migrants’.54 While over 33 million persons had applied for inclusion in the
NRC, over 1.9 million Assam residents– around 6 percent of the state’s population–were excluded.
The status of these NRC-excludees remains in legal limbo. While they were not barred from voting
in post-2019 assembly elections by the ECI, it is unclear how many of them have found their names
in electoral rolls during the 2024 General Election.
The north-eastern state has, historically, been the site of tensions between the dominant Assamesespeaking community and minority Bengali-speakers. The rise of the BJP has resulted in the broader‘anti-migrant’ movement in the state assuming a more overt communal character, targeting
Muslims almost exclusively.55

2.3.2. Impacts of recent delimitation, disadvantaging Muslims
In August 2023, the ECI had concluded the delimitation exercise for parliamentary and assembly
constituencies in Assam.56 While the BJP had praised exercise as defending the rights of theindigenous Assamese-speaking community, political analysts had highlighted discrepancies thatthey warned could lead to the disempowerment of several groups, particularly Muslims.57

53‘Assam Has 99,942 Doubtful Voters, Chief Minister Informs Assembly’ NDTV.com<https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/assamhas-99-942-doubtful-voters-chief-minister-himanta-biswa-sarma-informs-assembly-3878248> accessed 17 May 2024.
54‘New Citizenship Law in India “Fundamentally Discriminatory”: UN Human Rights Office’ UN News (13 December 2019)<https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/12/1053511> accessed 20 October 2021.
55
Talha Abdul Rahman, ‘Identifying the “Outsider”: An Assessment of Foreigner Tribunals in the Indian State of Assam’ (2020) 2
Statelessness & Citizenship Review <https://ssrn.com/abstract=3723694>.
56
Parvin Sultana, ‘The Politics of Delimitation in Assam’ (2023) 58 Economic and Political Weekly<https://www.epw.in/journal/2023/38/commentary/politics-delimitation-assam.html> accessed 7 March 2024.
57
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 6) 21.

19

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Recent reports have confirmed that these warnings are indeed coming true. For instance, in Barpeta
parliamentary constituency, where Muslim voters have historically played a decisive role, nomajor political party has put up a Muslim candidate for the 2024 General Election, in line with thereconfigured demography. Muslims’ share in the electorate in the constituency has reportedly
come down from 60 per cent to around 35 per cent.58 Political analysts have further alleged thatthe newly drawn constituency map gives an advantage to the Asom Gana Parishad (AGP), a party
that is allied to the BJP and engaged in a three-way contest against the opposition Congress Party
and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M).59 With Barpeta assembly constituency being
turned into a reserved constituency for Scheduled Castes (SCs), Muslims will not be able to contest
in future assembly elections either.

2.4. Continuing denial of full democracy in Jammu & Kashmir
The residents of the Muslim-majority territory of Jammu & Kashmir, which has been without any
form of popular government since June 2018, continue to be denied full democracy. Despite
legislative assembly elections being conducted in five states along with the ongoing parliamentaryelections, such polls have not been announced for J&K. (Elections to J&K’s five parliamentaryseats are being held along with other states and Union Territories, but have been marred byallegations of voter suppression – see section 2.1.5)
In December 2023, the Indian Supreme Court had ordered the Election Commission to conductlegislative assembly elections in J&K before 2024. It has so far failed to do so, citing security
concerns.60
In 2018, after the resignation of the formerly BJP-allied state Chief Minister (CM), J&K was put
under a 16-month-long period of Governor’s Rule and President Rule, under emergency provisionsof the Indian Constitution. Since October 2019, after the Indian government unilaterally revoked
the erstwhile state’s special constitutional protections and divided and downgraded it into two
Union Territories (UTs), the administration of J&K has been under the control of a LieutenantGovernor appointed directly by the BJP-led central government.

58

Rokibuz Zaman, ‘“No Muslim Can Win, Now or in the Future”: In Assam’s Barpeta, Delimitation Fears Confirmed’ Scroll.in (6May 2024) <https://scroll.in/article/1067465/no-muslim-can-win-now-or-in-the-future-in-assams-barpeta-delimitation-fearsconfirmed> accessed 16 May 2024.
59
ibid.
60
Peerzada Ashiq, ‘2024 J&K Assembly Elections Will Not Be Held along with Lok Sabha Elections. Here’s Why.’ The Hindu (16March 2024) <https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/jk-assembly-elections-will-not-be-held-along-with-lok-sabha-electionsheres-why/article67957925.ece> accessed 17 May 2024.

20

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

3. Do Indian voters have a ‘real choice’?
According to international human rights standards, the question of whether elections can beconsidered ‘genuine’ depends on whether they meet certain procedural guarantees, and on whether
they reflect and give effect to the free will of the electorate.61
In our Baseline report, we had highlighted several legacy features of India’s electoral and politicalsystem–including issues impacting political pluralism, such as the opacity of political financing
and the persecution of opposition political parties and candidates, as well as contentious elements
in voting systems and operations, such as the use of electronic voting machines (EVMs)–that raise
serious concerns about whether India’s elections indeed offer a ‘real choice’ to its electorate, andwhether there is a level playing field for all actors seeking to contest in the electoral arena.62
In our First Interim Report, we had highlighted more recent developments that dramatically
escalated these concerns, including: (i) the systematic mobilisation of various state agencies totarget key leaders of the opposition INDIA alliance, (ii) revelations from the recently-released data
pertaining to the financing of political parties, appearing to confirm that the BJP has cornered thelion’s share of political funding, and suggesting that it may have been involved in quid pro quo
relationships with corporate actors on a hitherto unprecedented scale, and (iii) continuing
weaknesses in the EVM-VVPAT system that is being used to conduct the ongoing General
Election.63
In this section, we briefly review some more recent developments regarding each of theseconcerns, as well as fresh allegations that the BJP may be attempting to ‘fix’ election in someconstituencies by intimidating opposition candidates.

3.1. Allegations of BJP ‘fixing’ elections by intimidating opposition
candidates
In an unprecedented development, the BJP is set to secure uncontested or virtually uncontested
victories in at least two parliamentary constituencies during the ongoing General Election,
depriving hundreds of thousands of voters the ability to meaningfully exercise their franchise infavour of their candidates of choice.

61

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (n 1) paras 84–101.
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 6).
63
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections, ‘First Interim Report (Covering the Period 16 March to 16 April, 2024)’(2024) 14 <https://indiaelectionmonitor.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/IPMIE-Report-17-April-2024.pdf>.
62

21

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

In Gujarat’s Surat constituency, the BJP’s candidate Mukesh Dalal has already been declared tohave won unopposed, after the opposition Congress Party candidate’s nomination form was
rejected by the ECI, apparently due to discrepancies in the signatures of his proposers.64 Eightother candidates who were scheduled to contest the Surat election independently or on behalf ofsmaller parties mysteriously withdrew their candidacy. News reports suggested that they may havebeen pressured into doing so.65
In Madhya Pradesh’s Indore constituency, the Congress Party was locked out of the contest after
its candidate withdrew his candidacy and formally joined the BJP. The BJP’s candidate is set tosecure a virtually uncontested victory, being pitted only against independents and those fromsmaller parties. News reports suggested that the remaining independent candidates are beingpressured into withdrawing.66
Additionally, at least three non-BJP candidates in Gandhinagar constituency–currently represented
by Home Minister Amit Shah–alleged that they were under pressure to withdraw their candidacy.67
And a stand-up comedian renowned for his mimicry of Prime Minister Narendra Modi alleged that
his candidacy to contest against Modi in Uttar Pradesh’s Varanasi constituency was summarily
rejected by the ECI.68 Later, at least eight other applicants who had applied to contest from
Varanasi alleged that the process was rigged.69
Surat, Indore, Gandhinagar and Varanasi are all considered BJP strongholds, but had previously
witnessed spirited campaigns from opposition candidates. Such pressures by the ruling party, if
true, undermine the very essence of democratic elections.

3.2. Continuing incarceration of senior opposition leaders

64

Dilip Singh Kshatriya, ‘BJP Wins Surat Seat after Poll Officer Rejects Congress Candidate’s Nomination Papers’ The New Indian
Express (22 April 2024) <https://www.newindianexpress.com/elections/2024/Apr/22/bjp-wins-surat-seat-after-poll-officerrejects-congress-candidates-nomination-papers> accessed 17 May 2024.
65
Kamal Saiyed, ‘The 8 Who Withdrew in Surat: Their Reasons, from “depression” to “Not Wasting Govt Money”’ The Indian
Express (3 May 2024) <https://indianexpress.com/article/political-pulse/surat-lok-sabha-elections-unopposed-congress9306126/> accessed 17 May 2024.
66
Sravasti Dasgupta, ‘Fake Signatures, Intimidating Calls: How Indore Lok Sabha Candidates Were Pushed to Leave the Fray’ The
Wire (12 May 2024) <https://thewire.in/politics/fake-signatures-intimidating-calls-how-indore-lok-sabha-candidates-left-pollfray> accessed 17 May 2024.
67‘Candidates Claim They Were under Pressure to Withdraw from Gandhinagar LS Contest’ The Print (4 May 2024)<https://theprint.in/india/candidates-claim-they-were-under-pressure-to-withdraw-from-gandhinagar-ls-contest/2070254/>
accessed 17 May 2024.
68
Aliza Noor, ‘Goal Was to Contest, Not Win: How Shyam Rangeela Was Stopped From Fighting Modi’ The Quint (17 May 2024)<https://www.thequint.com/elections/elections-goal-was-to-contest-not-win-shyam-rangeela-stopped-from-fighting-modivaranasi> accessed 17 May 2024.
69
Ayush Tiwari, ‘Varanasi Poll: As 33 Nominations Are Rejected, Eight Applicants Allege That the Process Was Rigged’ Scroll.in(18 May 2024) <https://scroll.in/article/1068014/varanasi-poll-as-33-nominations-are-rejected-eight-applicants-allege-that-theprocess-was-rigged> accessed 19 May 2024.

22

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

In our First Interim Report, we had highlighted the systematic mobilisation of key central
government agencies as well as tax authorities to target key opposition leaders, particularly thosebelonging to the INDIA alliance, in the weeks leading up to the ongoing General Election.
We are heartened by the Supreme Court’s decision to grant interim bail to Delhi Chief Minister
and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal to enable him to campaign, and by the factthat no new major actions have been taken by central agencies during the period covered in thisreport.
However, we note with concern that other key leaders – such as Jharkhand’s former Chief Minister
Hemant Soren (Jharkhand Mukti Morcha), Delhi’s former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia(AAP), K. Kavitha (Bharat Rashtra Samiti), Satyendar Jain (AAP), among others–remain
incarcerated, depriving the opposition of crucial campaigners.
Any election during which so many key opposition leaders are physically restrained from
campaigning is a far cry from being free or fair.

3.3. Electoral Bonds to monopolise political space
In our First Interim Report, we had called for an independent, court-monitored investigation into
the revelations arising from the release of data relating to electoral bonds by the State Bank ofIndia.70
We are heartened by reports that the Supreme Court of India (SC) has agreed to hear a petition
seeking the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate each instance ofpotential quid pro quo between the BJP government and corporate donors.71 We urge the SC toaddress the matter with the urgency it requires.
However, we note with concern that India’s Finance Minister has openly declared that, if reelected, the BJP would bring back Electoral Bonds in some form after wider consultations.72
We also reiterate that while the outlawing of electoral bonds was a definitive boost to efforts toclean up India’s political funding landscape, other infirmities highlighted in our Baseline Report–such as the lack of official caps on how much political parties can spend during elections,provisions in the Income Tax (IT) Act that exempt political parties from disclosing the sources of70

Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 63) 19.
‘Supreme Court Assures Listing of Plea for SIT Probe into Electoral Bonds Data’ The Hindu (14 May 2024)<https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/sc-assures-listing-of-plea-for-sit-probe-into-electoral-bondsdata/article68174772.ece> accessed 16 May 2024.
72‘Will Bring Back Electoral Bonds after Wider Consultations, Says Nirmala Sitharaman’ Scroll.in (20 April 2024)<https://scroll.in/latest/1066852/will-bring-back-electoral-bonds-after-wider-consultations-says-nirmala-sitharaman> accessed 17
May 2024.
71

23

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

donations amounting to less than ₹ 2,000, and the refusal of political parties to become subject toscrutiny under the Right to Information (RTI) Act–all remain unaddressed, and are set to mar
Indian democracy for years to come.73

3.4. Continuing accusations against the EVM-VVPAT system
In our previous report, we had highlighted several weaknesses in India’s voting operations,particularly those pertaining to the continued use of the Electronic Voting Machine & Voter
Verifiable Paper Audit Trial (EVM-VVPAT) system.74 We had echoed the concerns expressed bylegal and technical experts and other civil society actors over the possibility of remote and physicaltampering of EVMs, the inadequacy of the current system of cross-verification of EVMs withVVPATs, and called for the political economy behind the EVM-VVPAT system to become amatter of transparent public record.75
Recent developments, such as reports that four EVMs erroneously logged votes in favour of the
BJP during mock polls held in Kerala on 17 April do little to allay these concerns, despite steadfast
denials from the ECI.76
We are particularly disappointed with the Supreme Court’s recent dismissal of yet another petition
seeking a closer examination of reported irregularities with the EVM-VVPAT system, as well asa separate batch of pleas seeking 100% cross-verification between EVMs and VVPATs.77 It may
be recalled that in the aftermath of the 2019 General Election, investigative journalists had
uncovered a mismatch between the votes polled and votes counted in as many as 373
constituencies.
We reiterate our earlier assessment that ensuring 100% EVM-VVPAT cross-verification is a
crucial step in preserving the public’s trust in the reliability and integrity of official machinery
used in the voting process, and in ensuring that voters have the knowledge and capacity to verify
that their vote is cast-as-intended, recorded-as-cast, and counted-as-recorded. This is pivotal to
India’s elections being seen as ‘genuine’ and acknowledged as the free expression of the will of
its electorate.

73

Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 6) 24.
ibid 27.
75
ibid.
76
‘EC Informs SC That Reports of EVM Error in Kerala Are False’ The Hindu (18 April 2024)<https://www.thehindu.com/elections/lok-sabha/sc-asks-ec-to-check-reports-of-evms-registering-extra-votes-for-bjp-in-keralamock-polls/article68078738.ece> accessed 17 May 2024.
77
Krishnadas Rajagopal, ‘SC Thumbs-up for EVMs, Declines Plea to Revive Paper Ballot’ The Hindu (26 April 2024)<https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/evm-vvpat-to-stay-sc-rejects-plea-for-revival-of-ballot-papers/article68109025.ece>
accessed 16 May 2024.
74

24

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

4. Are Indian voters able to make an ‘informed choice’?
4.1. Introduction
A genuine election that reflects the free will of the population presupposes the free communicationof information and ideas about public and political issues.78 This, according to the UN Human
Rights Committee, ‘implies a free press and other media able to comment on public issues without
censorship or restraint and to inform public opinion.’79 Free and fair dissemination of messaging
from across the political spectrum is thus a critical element in determining whether the electorate
can make an independent and informed choice during elections, free of violence or the threat ofviolence, compulsion, inducement, or manipulative interference of any other kind.80
The UN has noted that while much political messaging that may be shocking, offensive or
disturbing is protected under international law, widespread disinformation may lead to ‘reducing
understanding among people with different opinions or backgrounds and exacerbating
polarisation, playing on and distorting people’s negative views of others’, and be used to ‘splinterand manipulate public discourse, depriving voters of critical information for their decisionmaking.’81 Social media in particular may be ‘instrumentalised to influence the outcome ofelections by discrediting candidates and political parties, providing incorrect information about thevoting process (voter suppression) and seeking to influence the voting choices of particularsegments of society that may be targeted based on patterns suggested by the processing of personal
data and social media activity.’82
In our Baseline Report, we had highlighted several structural and operational barriers that may be
impeding the average Indian voter’s ability to make an independent and informed choice during
elections, free of manipulative interference.83 These included the domination of broadcast andsocial media networks by actors friendly to the ruling the BJP’s continuing proclivity to use
communal polarisation and disinformation as part of its electoral strategy, and recent moves by
the BJP-led central government to muzzle independent voices and control the free flow of
information.84

78

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (n 1) para 97.
UN Human Rights Committee (n 3) para 25.
80
ibid 19.
81
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (n 1) para 101.
82
ibid.
83
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 6) 32.
84
ibid.
79

25

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

In our First Interim Report, we had noted that the BJP had continued to use communal polarisation
as the central plank of its messaging during the 2024 General Election, openly seeking votes in thename of religion, particularly invoking the recently-consecrated Ram Temple in Ayodhya.85
Since then, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the BJP has doubled down on its incendiary
sectarian rhetoric as well as misinformation to openly dehumanise and demonise minorities andopposition parties, and create fear among India’s Hindu majority through references to the decline
in its population, normalising a toxic atmosphere that is increasingly conducive to anti-minority
hostility, discrimination and violence.86 The media has largely continued to be subservient to the
BJP’s designs. Alongside, misinformation and hate content have continued to flood social media
networks.

4.2. Communal polarisation as electoral strategy
The voluntary Model Code of Conduct (MCC) prohibits all activities that may ‘aggravate existing
differences or create mutual hatred or cause tension between different castes and communities,
religious or linguistic.’87 It specifically proscribes appeals to caste or communal feelings forsecuring votes, and using places of worship as forums for election propaganda.88
The Representation of the People Act (RPA) also addresses hate speech and other forms ofcommunal electioneering, both as ‘corrupt practices’ (which entail civil liability and can bebrought before courts at the end of the election period) and as ‘electoral offences’ (which entail
criminal liability and can be taken cognisance of and proceeded with as soon as the offence iscommitted). Appeals by a candidate (or any person acting with their consent) to vote on religious(among other) grounds, appealing to religious or national symbols, promotion of enmity between
different communities, and publishing false statements are all ‘corrupt practices’ that are grounds
for a candidate’s disqualification.89 Additionally any person (and not just the candidate) who ‘inconnection with an election’ promotes or attempts to promote enmity between different classes on
religious (among other) grounds is subject to criminal liability.90
Despite the stated legal prohibitions specified above, no less than the Prime Minister of India has
been at the forefront of the BJP’s incendiary and communal fear-mongering during the 2024
General Election. In our First Interim Report, we had highlighted several speeches by Narendra
Modi with communal undertones that seemed to be in violation of the MCC and the RPA. These
85

Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 63) 26.
‘EAC-PM Report: Hindu Population Drops by 7.82%, Muslim Rises by 43.15% from 1950 to 2015’ BusinessLine (9 May 2024)<https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/elections/eac-pm-report-hindu-population-drops-by-782-muslim-rises-by-4315from-1950-to-2015/article68157274.ece> accessed 21 May 2024.
87
Election Commission of India, ‘Model Code of Conduct for the Guidance of the Political Parties and Candidates’ s I.1<https://www.eci.gov.in/mcc/>.
88
ibid I.3.
89
The Representation of the People Act 1951 s 123.
90
ibid 125A.
86

26

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

had included, inter alia, calling upon voters to remember the oppositions ‘sins’ against Hinduism,
and portraying the opposition as conspiring to destroy ‘shakti’.91

4.2.1. Communal fear-mongering and misinformation by Prime Minister Modi
4.2.1.1. PM Modi’s speech in Banswara on 21 April, 2024
Since the conclusion of the first phase of polling, PM Modi’s speeches have become dramaticallymore egregious. On 21 April, at a public meeting in Banswara district (Rajasthan), Modi wasreported referring to Muslims as ‘infiltrators’ and ‘those with more children’. He was also reported
accusing the opposition Congress Party of conspiring to ‘snatch’ wealth from Hindu women and
Adivasis and distribute it to ‘infiltrators’.
‘When they (the opposition Congress-led government) were in power, they had said
that Muslims have the first right over the country’s assets. This means that they will
distribute wealth to those who have more children and those who are infiltrators. Is
this acceptable to you?’ (translated excerpt of PM Modi’s speech in Banswara on 21
April, 2024)92
The speech was widely streamed online (including by Modi’s personal accounts) and broadcast
widely on television. Modi is also reported to have delivered similar versions of this speech, albeit
without direct references to Muslims, on at least two occasions – on 22 April in Aligarh (Uttar
Pradesh), and on 23 April in Tonk-Swai Madhopur (Rajasthan).93
Modi’s speech appears to be in violation of election-time legal provisions in the RPA, and ispotentially grounds both for his disqualification as a candidate (Section 123) as well as for thecommencement of criminal proceedings against him (Section 125A). Additionally, the speech may
also be in violation of other provisions in the penal code that prohibit and criminalise, inter alia,
outraging religious feelings (Section 297 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita).
Despite this, authorities in India–including state police, as well as the ECI–have so far notcommenced any sort of formal investigation into the speech. The only action known to have been
initiated so far has been in the form of a notice issued by the ECI to the President of the BJP–and
not to Modi himself–asking him to bring to the notice of all the party’s star campaigners the need91

Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 63) 27.
PM
Shri
Narendra
Modi
Addresses
PublicMeetinginBanswara,
RajasthanYouTube<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1Yll0JbtzI> accessed 17 May 2024.
93
PM Modi Live | Public Meeting in Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh (2024) <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUn-Ces_dZQ> accessed
17 May 2024.
92

27

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

to ‘set high standards of political standards of political discourse and observe provisions of model
code of conduct in letter and spirit’. The ECI’s notice does not mention Modi’s name at all.
Additionally, Modi’s speech may also amount to a criminal offence under international law.
According to the UN, factors to be assessed while evaluating the potential criminality of aparticular statement include (i) the context of the statement, (ii) the speaker’s position or status,(iii) intent to incite audience against target group, (iv) content and form of the statement, (v) extent
of its dissemination, and (vi) likelihood of harm, including imminence.94 Considering thecommunally and politically charged context prevalent in India, as well as the official position,
popular following and apparent impunity enjoyed by Modi (speaker) from domestic authorities,
his direct mention of Muslims together with references to widely-known conspiracy theories
associated with them (content and form), and his direct call to listeners to vote on the basis of suchtheories (intent), the speech in question is likely to lead to further hostility, discrimination andpotentially violence (likelihood of harm) against India’s Muslims. As such, it potentially amounts
to prohibited hate speech under international law.

4.2.1.2. Other false and communal statements by PM Modi
In a news interview that was broadcast on 14 May, PM Modi appeared to backtrack on his
comments against Muslims–denying that he had ever directly referred to them as ‘infiltrators’ and‘those with more children’–or that he had ever engaged in ‘Hindu-Muslim’ politics.95 However,this appears to have been an attempt to gaslight the electorate–Modi has previously openly referred
to relief camps hosting Muslim victims of communal violence in Gujarat as ‘children-producing
factories’ and also coined a phrase mocking polygamy and high birth rates among Muslims.96
Indeed, he has continued to make false, outlandish and openly communal statements throughout
the current General Election. Some of these include:•

94

Characterising the ongoing General Election as a choice between ‘vote jihad’ and ‘Ram
Rajya’.97‘OHCHR and Freedom of Expression vs Incitement to Hatred: The Rabat Plan of Action’ (OHCHR)<https://www.ohchr.org/en/freedom-of-expression> accessed 17 May 2024.
95
News18 [@CNNnews18], ‘#Exclusive | “I Neither Mentioned Muslim nor Hindu”: PM Modi on His “Those Who Have MoreChildren, Infiltrators Remark” “The Day I Do ‘Hindu-Muslim’ I Will Not Be Eligible to Stay in Public Life,” He Adds
@RubikaLiyaquat|#PMModiToNews18India#LokSabhaPolls
Https://T.Co/4sAvAnd62q’<https://twitter.com/CNNnews18/status/1790309818420363664> accessed 16 May 2024.
96
Ziya Us Salam, ‘Scars of Memory’ (Frontline, 21 July 2017) <https://frontline.thehindu.com/books/scars-ofmemory/article9749694.ece> accessed 26 April 2021.
97
Neelam Pandey, ‘“Vote Jihad” or “Ram Rajya” — Modi Asks People to Choose at Madhya Pradesh Rally’ ThePrint (7 May
2024)<https://theprint.in/politics/vote-jihad-or-ram-rajya-modi-asks-people-to-choose-at-madhya-pradesh-rally/2073554/>
accessed 16 May 2024.

28

•
•

•
•

•
•

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Claims that the opposition Congress Party and Samajwadi Party intend to snatch wealthfrom Hindus and give it to ‘vote jihadis’.98
Claims that the opposition Congress Party intends to snatch affirmative action benefits
from Dalits and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and redistribute it to its ‘jihadi votebank.’99 (Modi has also promised that there would be no quotas for Muslims so long as heis alive.100)
Claims that the Congress would give priority to minorities in sports, and that the nationalcricket team would be selected on the basis of religion.101
Claims that the Congress Party intends to put a ‘Babri lock’ on the newly-consecrated Ram
Temple in Ayodhya if it comes to power.102 Also that the Ram Temple would be bulldozed
should the Opposition come to power.103
Claims that if voters have two houses, the Congress would seize one and redistribute it.104
Claims that the Congress would impose a 55 per cent inheritance tax if voted to power.105

The claims highlighted above are only a small sample of the false and incendiary speechesdelivered by Modi, steeped in Islamophobia and underlined by unfounded accusations that
opposition parties are conspiring on behalf of Muslims to ‘snatch’ benefits from Hindus.106
It bears repeating that none of these speeches, which continue to be delivered brazenly on a daily
basis, have invited sanctions from the ECI. The ECI later justified its approach – of addressing
party chiefs instead of individual leaders in its directives – as a ‘new course’ to ‘raise theaccountability of the political party in compliance of MCC by all their cadres’, as the parties have98

‘PM Modi: “Congress Will Distribute Wealth to Vote Jihadis” | News - Times of India Videos’ (The Times of India)<https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/short-videos/news/pm-modi-congress-will-distribute-wealth-to-votejihadis/shorttakes/110209502.cms> accessed 17 May 2024.
99
The Federal, ‘Congress Will “snatch” SC, Dalit OBC Quotas and Give to “Jihadi Vote Bank”: PM Modi’ (3 May 2024)<https://thefederal.com/category/elections-2024//congs-historic-low-in-ls-seats-expected-rahuls-rae-bareli-move-suggestswayanad-defeat-concern-pm-120756> accessed 17 May 2024.
100‘No Quota for Muslims as Long as I Am Alive, Says PM Modi’ The Hindu (30 April 2024)<https://www.thehindu.com/elections/lok-sabha/no-quota-for-muslims-as-long-as-i-am-alive-says-pmmodi/article68125463.ece> accessed 17 May 2024.
101‘Congress to Decide Indian Cricket Team Based on Religion, Claims PM Modi’ Scroll.in (8 May 2024)<https://scroll.in/latest/1067609/congress-to-decide-indian-cricket-team-based-on-religion-claims-pm-modi> accessed 16 May
2024.
102
‘Want 400 Seats So Congress Doesn’t Put “Babri Lock” On Ram Temple: PM’ NDTV.com (8 May 2024)<https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/pm-modi-says-want-400-seats-so-congress-doesnt-put-babri-lock-on-ram-temple-5611773>
accessed 17 May 2024.
103
Mayank Kumar, ‘SP, Congress Will Run Bulldozer over Ram Temple If Voted to Power, Says PM Modi in U.P.’s Barabanki’
The Hindu (17 May 2024) <https://www.thehindu.com/elections/lok-sabha/sp-congress-will-run-bulldozer-over-ram-temple-ifvoted-to-power-says-modi-in-up/article68187833.ece> accessed 21 May 2024.
104
Tabassum Barnagarwala and Abhik Deb, ‘Fact-Checking Five Days of Narendra Modi’s Speeches: A Catalogue of Lies’
Scroll.in (28 April 2024) <https://scroll.in/article/1067126/fact-checking-five-days-of-narendra-modis-speeches-a-catalogue-oflies> accessed 16 May 2024.
105‘Congress Will Impose 55% Inheritance Tax, If Voted to Power: PM Modi’ Business Standard (30 April 2024)<https://www.business-standard.com/elections/lok-sabha-election/congress-will-impose-55-inheritance-tax-if-voted-to-powerpm-modi-124043000889_1.html> accessed 16 May 2024.
106
Tabassum Barnagarwala and Abhik Deb (n 104).

29

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

‘prime responsibility to rein in their star campaigners from committing such violations’.107 This
logic is baffling – the speeches in question are not just violations of the voluntary MCC, but alsoof the laws of the land that everyone is required to abide by. And it is the ECI, not political party
chiefs, that has been vested with plenary powers, both by the Constitution and by Supreme Court
case law, to oversee the conduct of free and fair elections.
Despite this failure of the ECI to adequately address the communal fearmongering unleashed by
PM Modi, India’s Supreme Court has so far refused to entertain pleas seeking its intervention.108

4.2.2. Communal fear-mongering and misinformation by other senior BJP
leaders and channels
Unsurprisingly, the line of attack launched by Modi has also been followed by other senior BJP
leaders. Leaders who have parroted some form of the same narrative–of the opposition conspiring
on behalf of Muslims to snatch benefits from Hindus–include, among many others:
•
•
•
•
•

Amit Shah (Home Minister of India)109
Rajnath Singh (Defence Minister of India)110
Anurag Thakur (Sports Minister of India)111
Yogi Adityanath (Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh)112
J.P. Nadda (President of BJP)113

The same narrative has also been pushed through the BJP’s official social media channels, eachwith millions of followers:
107

Election Commission of India, ‘Commission’s Second Suo Motu Report on Two Month’s Enforcement of MCC during GE
2024’ (n 8).
108‘Hate Speech: Supreme Court Refuses to Entertain Plea against PM Modi, Anurag Thakur’ India Today (14 May 2024)<https://www.indiatoday.in/law/story/hate-speech-supreme-court-refuses-to-entertain-plea-against-pm-modi-anurag-thakur2538987-2024-05-14> accessed 16 May 2024.
109‘“Can Country Run on Sharia”: Amit Shah Claims Congress Wants Separate Law for Minorities’ (The Indian Express, 27 April
2024)<https://indianexpress.com/article/india/can-country-run-on-sharia-amit-shah-claims-congress-wants-separate-law-forminorities-9293101/> accessed 17 May 2024; ‘Lok Sabha Poll Contest between Vote for Development and “Vote for Jihad”: Amit
Shah’ The Economic Times (9 May 2024) <https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/elections/lok-sabha/telangana/lok-sabhapoll-contest-between-vote-for-development-and-vote-for-jihad-amit-shah/articleshow/109983179.cms?from=mdr> accessed 17
May 2024.
110
Sravasti Dasgupta, ‘EC Notice No Bar, BJP’s Star Campaigners Echo Modi’s Communal Pitch’ The
Wire<https://thewire.in/communalism/ec-notice-no-bar-bjps-star-campaigners-echo-modis-communal-pitch> accessed 17 May
2024.
111
‘Congress Wants to Give Your Children’s Property to Muslims: Anurag Thakur’ (India Today, 28 April 2024)<https://www.indiatoday.in/elections/lok-sabha/story/anurag-thakur-claims-congress-wants-to-give-property-to-muslims-pollrally-2532553-2024-04-28> accessed 16 May 2024.
112‘Congress
Manifesto
Dangerous
forCountry:
Yogi’(Hindustan
Times,
26
April
2024)
<https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/lucknow-news/congress-manifesto-dangerous-for-country-yogi101714143265744.html> accessed 17 May 2024.
113
Sravasti Dasgupta (n 110).

30

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024•

On 29 April, the BJP’s official Instagram account (@bjp4india) posted an animated video
demonising Muslims and directly referring to them as ‘terrorists’, ‘invaders’ and ‘robbers’–
and claiming that the Congress wanted to seize property from non-Muslims and give it toMuslims.114 The video is no longer accessible–it is unclear whether it was taken down by
the BJP or by Instagram’s content moderation team. The ECI is not known to have initiatedany action.

•

On 4 May, the BJP Karnataka unit’s official X account (@bjp4karnataka) posted anotheranimated video featuring opposition leaders feeding ‘funds’ to a parasitic Muslim bird thatpushes other birds (labelled ‘SC’, ‘ST’ and ‘OBC’) out of a nest. A day after polling had
concluded in Karnataka, the ECI directed X (and not the BJP) to take down the video,
saying it violated the ‘extant legal framework’.115

Other appeals to vote on the basis of religion have continued unabated in both offline and online
settings, both by senior BJP leaders – including PM Modi116 – as well as junior leaders.117 Someleaders–like BJP MLA T. Raja Singh in Telangana–have continued to openly advocate forviolence against Muslims.118

4.2.3. Continuing anti-minority incitement by other Hindu nationalist leaders
In our First Interim Report, we had noted with alarm that despite the activation of the MCC, andthe enhancement of security measures across the country, extremist Hindu nationalist actors,
including many who reportedly have close ties with the BJP, were continuing to organise public
events where influential individuals were engaging in open incitement to hostility, discrimination,and violence against India’s minorities.119
This trend has continued. Between 1 February and 30 April, South Asia Justice Campaign
documented 130 instances of ‘top-level’ or ‘intermediate-level’ incitement by senior political and114‘BJP’s Official Instagram Page Runs into Trouble for Posting Communal Content amid MCC’ The Hindu (4 May 2024)<https://www.thehindu.com/elections/lok-sabha/bjps-official-instagram-page-runs-into-trouble-for-posting-communal-contentamid-mcc/article68139687.ece> accessed 16 May 2024.
115‘After Poll Campaigning Ends, EC Directs X to Take down Karnataka BJP Video Targeting Muslims’ Scroll.in (7 May 2024)<https://scroll.in/latest/1067575/after-ec-instruction-karnataka-police-ask-x-to-take-down-bjp-campaign-video-demonisingmuslims> accessed 16 May 2024.
116
NarendraModi[@narendramodi],‘रामभारतकीआSाहै ,रामभारतकाआधारहै ...
https://t.co/iyZm0ponNm’<https://twitter.com/narendramodi/status/1780445364187013216> accessed 16 May 2024.
117
Livemint, ‘“Jai Shri Ram Nahi Kehna Toh Pakistan Jaa Sakte Hain”: BJP’s Navneet Rana’ (mint, 6 May 2024)<https://www.livemint.com/politics/news/jai-shri-ram-pakistan-bjp-gujarat-navneet-rana-kutch-bharuch-lok-sabha-elections11714989131672.html> accessed 16 May 2024.
118
Alka Dhupkar, ‘104 FIRs, but There’s No Stopping This BJP MLA’s Hate Speeches’ The Times ofIndia<https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/104-firs-but-theres-no-stopping-this-bjp-mlas-hatespeeches/articleshow/109376157.cms> accessed 17 May 2024.
119
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 63) 30.

31

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

religious figures not officially affiliated with the BJP.120 Of these, 123 (95 per cent) were reported
from states and territories where BJP governments are in power and in control of law & order.121

4.3. A partisan broadcast media, exacerbating the problem
In our First Interim Report, we had highlighted several patterns we had observed in media coverageduring the 2024 General Election, including the partisan tone taken by most popular broadcast
networks in favour of the BJP and PM Modi, and against opposition parties.122
A study by The News Minute, an online news platform, confirmed these trends after analysing
primetime news segments broadcast by six television networks between 1 February and 12 April.
Of the 429 segments surveyed in total, 52 per cent had anti-opposition themes, while 27 per centwere dedicated to praising PM Modi and the government.123 5.6 per cent (24 segments) had
communal themes, particularly targeting Muslims.124

4.4. Hate speech and misinformation on online platforms
In our First Interim Report, we had highlighted the continued proliferation of hate speech andmisinformation across all major social media platforms operating in India, including those under
Meta (like Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram), and others like X.125
Two new investigative reports appeared to confirm that the problem is potentially escalating. A
joint investigation by The London Story, India Civil Watch International and Eko uncovered a vast
network of ‘shadow advertisers’ pushing a coordinated disinformation campaign on Meta in favourof the BJP during a 90-day period leading up to 25 March.126 These undisclosed campaigners, who
operate beyond the scope of laws and ECI regulations pertaining to advertising spending, spent
120‘Top’ level hate speech refers to advocacy of discriminatory hatred constituting incitement to hostility, discrimination, orviolence, and incitement to genocide, all of which are prohibited under international law. ‘Intermediate’ level hate speech refers tospeech that may be prohibited by States to protect the rights or reputations of others, or for the protection of national security or of
public order, or of public health or morals. See United Nations, ‘Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech: Detailed Guidanceon
Implementationfor
UnitedNations
Field
Presences’(2020)<https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/UN%20Strategy%20and%20PoA%20on%20Hate%20Speech_Guidance%20on%20Addressing%20in%20field.pdf>.
121
South Asia Justice Campaign, ‘India Persecution Tracker | 2024/2’ (South Asia Justice Campaign, 8 May 2024)<https://southasiajusticecampaign.org/ipt2024-2/> accessed 17 May 2024.
122
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 63) 33.
123
Shubhang Gautam, Ishita Pradeep, and Saeeduzzaman, ‘What Primetime TV Said Ahead of LS Polls: 52% against Oppn, 1% on
Jobs and Education’ The News Minute (24 April 2024) <https://www.thenewsminute.com/news/what-primetime-tv-said-ahead-ofls-polls-52-against-oppn-1-on-jobs-and-education> accessed 16 May 2024.
124
ibid.
125
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 63) 34.
126
Ekō, India Civil Watch International, and The London Story, ‘Slander, Lies, Incitement: India’s Million Dollar Election Meme
Network’ (2024) <https://thelondonstory.org/wp-content/uploads/Slander-Lies-and-Incitement_Report-2-compressed.pdf>.

32

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

nearly 22 per cent (amounting to around Rs. 8.83 crore, or Rs 88.3 million) of the total sum spent
on election advertisements during the period studied.127 Another investigation, by BOOM Live,revealed that this proliferation of shadow advertisements on Meta continued through March andsurged in April, with overall expenditure by ‘obscure pages containing surrogate ads’ rising to Rs.
4.4 crore (Rs. 44 million) in April. This surge, according to the report, was accompanied by anincrease in the dissemination of Islamophobic or hateful content on these pages.128
We reiterate that social media platforms, as do all companies, have the responsibility to prevent,address and remedy human rights violations.129 In the context of India’s General Election, as
Human Rights Watch (HRW) has summarized that this entails the responsibility to ‘conductongoing human rights due diligence, and to revisit existing due diligence measures to take into
account the heightened risks to human rights that elections present.’130

127

ibid.
Archis Chowdhury, ‘Islamophobic Ads Flood Meta Platforms In The Middle Of Indian Elections’ BOOM Live (9 May 2024)<https://www.boomlive.in/news/meta-google-political-ads-lok-sabha-elections-2024-bjp-congress-islamophobia-25202>
accessed 17 May 2024.
129
United Nations, ‘Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect andRemedy”
Framework’(OfficeoftheHigh
Commissioner
for
Human
Rights2011)<https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/publications/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf>.
130‘India’s General Elections, Technology, and Human Rights Questions and Answers’ (Human Rights Watch, 8 April 2024)<https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/04/08/indias-general-elections-technology-and-human-rights-questions-and-answers> accessed
14 April 2024.
128

33

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

5. Is the Election Commission of India independent andobjective?
5.1. Introduction
As an extension of the international legal obligation of States to respect, protect, and fulfil humanrights, electoral management bodies (EMBs) are obligated to ensure the integrity of the electoral
process.131 EMBs must be able to function independently, and to ensure that the electoral process
is conducted fairly, impartially and in accordance with established laws that are compatible with
the ICCPR.132 Their decision-making must be open, transparent and maximally consultative, andall stakeholders must be provided access to relevant information.133 Further, in accordance withthe rights to a fair trial and to an effective remedy, States are obligated to ensure independent
judicial review or other complaints and appeals procedures.134 Remedies must be prompt,
adequate, effective, and enforceable within the context of the electoral calendar.135
In our Baseline Report, we had highlighted allegations made by opposition parties and civil society
actors regarding the conduct of the Election Commission of India, the constitutional body tasked
with overseeing the conduct of free and fair election, particularly during the 2019 General
Election.136 We also highlighted several structural weaknesses that imperil the independence of
the ECI, and make it prone to executive interference, inhibiting its ability to ensure a level playing
for all political parties.137
In our First Interim Report, we highlighted several recent developments that further deepened fears
that the ECI would not be an impartial arbiter, including the introduction of an opaque new system
for appointment of Election Commissioners, and the subsequent appointment of alleged BJP
loyalists as ECs ahead of the 2024 General Election.138 We had noted that in the month leading up
to the first phase of polling, the ECI had failed to act decisively against communal hate speeches
and other MCC violations by the BJP’s top leadership.139

131

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (n 1) para 114.
UN Human Rights Committee (n 3) para 20.
133
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Guidelines for States on the Effective Implementation of the Right toParticipate in Public Affairs’ (United Nations 2018) A/HRC/39/28 para 45.
134
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (n 1) paras 128–129.
135
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (n 133) para 46.
136
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 6) 42.
137
ibid.
138
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections (n 63) 38.
139
ibid 40.
132

34

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Since then, with the BJP’s messaging worsening even further in tone and tenor, we note withconsternation that the ECI has virtually acted like an arm of the government, giving free rein to
BJP leaders, while applying a different set of standards to opposition parties.

5.2. Inordinate delay in release of voter turnout figures
The ECI has courted controversy for excessively delaying the voter turnout figures for the firsttwo phases of polling, held on 19 April and 26 April, respectively. According to the ECI, the final
voter turnout for the first phase was 66.14 per cent (up from the provisional figure of 60 per centit had announced on 19 April) and 66.71 per cent for the second phase (up from the 60.96 per centfigure announced on 26 April). This inordinate delay in releasing the data, the sharp andunexplained rise in final voting percentages compared to previously announced provisional
figures, and the ECI’s refusal to divulge the absolute number of votes polled in both phases haveall invited criticism from wide quarters, including opposition leaders as well as local civilsociety.140 A case was filed by the Association for Democratic Reform in the Supreme Court on
the issue.141
Mallikarjun Kharge, the leader of Congress Party and the INDIA alliance, described thesedevelopments as casting a ‘dark shadow’ on the ECI’s functioning, noting that the delay raises‘serious doubts on the quality of data’.142The Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M),
another member of the INDIA alliance, expressed its apprehension about the possibility ofmanipulation of results at the time of counting.143
Other experts too have called out the ECI for this delay. M.G. Devasahayam, a former bureaucrat
who heads the Citizens Commission on Elections (CCE), pointed out that there was no reasonable
explanation for the ECI’s refusal to divulge the actual number of voters – as per protocol, theReturning Officer (RO) in charge of overseeing elections in any constituency would have filed all
polling data with the ECI by around 7 a.m. the day after polling, implying that the ECI is definitely

140

Abhik Deb, ‘Why Are Concerns Being Raised about the Election Commission’s Voter Turnout Data?’ Scroll.in (1 May 2024)<https://scroll.in/article/1067322/why-are-concerns-being-raised-about-the-election-commissions-voter-turnout-data> accessed
16 May 2024.
141
Debby Jain, ‘Lok Sabha Elections : Supreme Court To Hear Plea To Direct ECI To Immediately Publish Absolute Numbers Of
Votes Polled On May 17’ (13 May 2024) <https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-adr-plea-immediate-publication-ofvote-numbers-to-be-heard-on-may-17-257735> accessed 22 May 2024.
142
Mallikarjun Kharge [@kharge], ‘My Letter to the Leaders of INDIA Parties, Regarding the Discrepancies in the Voting Data
Released by Election Commission of India and Non-Publishing of Registered Voters. Sharing the Text of the Same - 2024 Lok
Sabha
Elections
Is
the
Fight
to
Save
DemocracyandtheHttps://T.Co/cwIokvYlIo’<https://twitter.com/kharge/status/1787692196126130303> accessed 16 May 2024.
143‘Poll Body Must Reveal Number of Voters in First Two Election Phases: Ex-Chief Election Commissioner’ Scroll.in (6 May
2024)<https://scroll.in/latest/1067493/poll-body-must-reveal-number-of-voters-in-first-two-election-phases-ex-chief-electioncommissioner> accessed 16 May 2024.

35

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

in possession of all the data that it refuses to divulge.144 S.Y. Quraishi, a former Chief Election
Commissioner (CEC), described the non-disclosure as unacceptable.145
The ECI has been belligerent in its response, albeit without addressing the substance of thecriticism. In an irate letter to Kharge, the ECI accused him of spreading ‘blatant inaccuracies’,‘attacking the very credibility of the electoral steps and processes’, and ‘vitiating’ its‘constitutionally mandated work’.146
Indeed, with the final turnout figures still not publicly accessible at the time of writing, what hasreally been an attack on the credibility of the electoral process is the ECI’s complete failure to betransparent and consultative in good faith, and its insistence on hiding crucial information fromthe electorate.

5.3. Potential collaboration with BJP in facilitating foreignobservers, and refusal to engage with civil society
On 1 May, it was reported that the representatives of 18 political parties from 10 countries had
arrived in India after being invited by the ruling BJP to witness the ongoing General Election.147
On 5 May, an ECI statement claimed that a total of 75 delegates representing ‘Electoral
Management Bodies (EMBs) and organisations’ from 23 countries, as well as members from theInternational Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), and media teams from Bhutan and Israel,
had arrived in India as part of the ECI’s International Election Visitors’ Programme (IEVP).148 In
another statement, on 9 May, the ECI claimed that the IEVP delegation had unanimously
concluded that India’s elections were ‘peaceful, inclusive and accessible and takes place in festive
mood.’149
It is unclear if the political party delegation invited by the BJP was part of the IEVP. If yes, suchopen collaboration between the ruling party and the ECI would be deeply problematic.
144

G. Sampath, ‘What Explains the Extraordinary Delay in Sharing of Polling Data by the Election Commission? (Interview with
M.G. Devasahayam)’ The Hindu (8 May 2024) <https://www.thehindu.com/podcast/delay-in-sharing-of-polling-data-by-theec/article68153037.ece> accessed 16 May 2024.
145‘Poll Body Must Reveal Number of Voters in First Two Election Phases: Ex-Chief Election Commissioner’ (n 143).
146‘Complaint on Turnout “Our EVM Moment”, Had to Respond, Says EC Official’ The Indian Express (12 May 2024)<https://indianexpress.com/elections/complaint-on-turnout-our-evm-moment-had-to-respond-says-ec-official-9322893/>
accessed 17 May 2024.
147
Kallol Bhattacherjee, ‘Israel’s Likud among Foreign Parties Invited by BJP to Witness Election’ The Hindu (1 May 2024)<https://www.thehindu.com/elections/lok-sabha/israels-likud-among-foreign-parties-invited-by-bjp-to-witnesselection/article68129332.ece> accessed 17 May 2024.
148
Election Commission of India, ‘Press Note: Largest Ever Global Delegation to Witness India’s General Election’ (2024)<https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2019671>.
149
Election Commission of India, ‘Press Note: 75 Delegates from 23 Countries Witness the Poll Process First-Hand in 6 States asPart of IEVP’ (2024) ECI/PN/79/2024 <https://elections24.eci.gov.in/docs/qi1V0sJbnJ.pdf>.

36

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Regardless, civil society organisations have alleged that they were stopped from meeting membersof the IEVP delegation, lending credence to claims that it was a ‘stage-managed exercise.’150 There
are no known reports of the IEVP delegates interacting with domestic civil society representatives
anywhere at any point.

5.4.

Skewing the electoral playing field in favour of the BJPAs alluded to throughout this report, and in our previous reports, the current ECI has appeared to
be an active participant in the hitherto unprecedented–and dangerous–skewing of the electoral
playing field in favour of the BJP, to the detriment of opposition parties, and with potentiallydevastating consequences for India’s minorities. A snapshot summary of the ECI’s conduct during
the 2024 General Election follows:
Subject
Potential voter
suppression tactics
targeting Muslim votersduring 2024 GE
Other polling-day
violations potentially
impacting the right tovoteContinuing impacts ofprevious voter
suppression methods in
Assam
Denial of full democracy
in Jammu & Kashmir

Review of ECI’s conduct
Universal suffrage
Largely unresponsive – on several occasions (such as the deletion of 700+ Muslims fromvoter rolls in Gujarat), the ECI has defended its actions.
ECI has appeared to order repolls only when discrepancies have been caught on camera
and caused public outcry. It has been relatively bolder regarding violations in non-BJP
states, as was the case after polling day violence in Andhra Pradesh.
ECI has played a central role – it led the recently-concluded delimitation exercise thathas disadvantaged Muslims, and it has separately declared close to 100,000 current
Assam residents as D-voters over previous decades.
ECI has refused to conduct concurrent assembly polls in J&K, despite organising thesame in five other states along with the ongoing 2024 General Election.

Real choiceAllegations of BJP‘fixing’ elections by
intimidating opposition
candidates
Systematic mobilisationof state agencies against
opposition leaders
Use of electoral bonds tomonopolise politicalfunding
150

ECI declared the BJP candidate as the unopposed winner in Gujarat. No reported action
in other cases.
ECI has not addressed the issue in 2024, despite issuing an advisory in 2019 that all
enforcement actions during the election period must be neutral and impartial.
ECI originally stated its objection to electoral bonds, but has since changed its stance.

Bansy Kalappa and Naushad Bijapur, ‘Kept Away from Foreign Team Studying Karnataka Polls, Says Civil Society’ The New
Indian Express (8 May 2024) <https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/karnataka/2024/May/08/kept-away-from-foreign-teamstudying-karnataka-polls-says-civil-society> accessed 17 May 2024.

37

Legacy issues with the
EVM-VVPAT system

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

ECI has steadfastly and belligerently defended EVM-VVPATs in court, while refusal tomeaningfully engage with civil society concerns.

Informed choiceCommunal fearmongering Before the first phase of polling, the ECI initiated action – by directing the registration ofand misinformation by
FIRs – against some middle-level BJP leaders for hate speech. (For example: Tejasvi
senior BJP leaders
Surya, Shobha Karandlaje and CT Ravi)
Regarding communal fearmongering by PM Modi since the first phase, ECI has only
issued a notice to the BJP President, without mentioning Modi. It has taken no further
action despite Modi and other senior BJP leaders continuing incendiary sectarianrhetoric. Throughout the 2024 General Election, ECI has refused to address the open
invocation of the Ram Temple by BJP leaders to seek votes.
The ECI has defended its new approach – of sending directives to party chiefs instead ofstar campaigners – as a ‘new course’ to ensure accountability for political parties, whoaccording to it have ‘prime responsibility’ to rein in individual leaders.

Posting of hateful online
content by BJP’s official
accounts

At the same time, ECI has sent more forceful notices to several senior opposition leadersindividually, including Randeep Surjewala (for making a disparaging remark about a BJP
candidate), Supriya Shrinate (for a disparaging social media post about a BJP candidate),
Atishi (for alleging that she had been approached by an unnamed BJP figure to join thatparty) and Shashi Tharoor (for making unverified allegations about a local BJP
candidate).151
Regarding the posting of hateful online content by BJP’s official accounts, it issued only
one takedown order – in Karnataka, after polling had concluded, and that too without
directly addressing the BJP.
At the same time, the BJP has issued takedown orders to X regarding social media postsby the opposition YSR Congress (post deleted and not available for analysis), the Telugu
Desam Party (for a post alleging potential involvement of the YSR Congress in drugs
trafficking), and the Aam Aadmi Party (for a post referring to PM Modi as a ‘Bond Chor’(thief)).152 A Bihar BJP leader’s post too was taken down, for a post personally attacking
senior opposition leader Lalu Yadav.

Anti-minority incitementby other Hindu nationalist
leaders
Partisanship andfearmongering by media
151

The ECI was also reported to have ordered AAP to modify its election campaign song,claiming that a phrase in it (‘we will respond to jail with votes’) ‘cast aspersions on the
judiciary.’153
No action reported despite several speeches containing open calls to vote on the basis ofreligion.
No action regarding partisan and divisive media coverage. No action regarding broadcastof propaganda films, including on state-owned television channels.

TK Rajalakshmi, ‘ECI under a Cloud for Going Soft on PM Modi’s Communal Utterances’ Frontline (9 May 2024)<https://frontline.thehindu.com/politics/eci-going-soft-on-modi-communal-muslim-remarks/article68157791.ece> accessed 17
May 2024.
152
Sarasvati NT, ‘Only 9 Takedown Requests by ECI despite Rising Hate Speech: RTI’ (MediaNama, 16 May 2024)<https://www.medianama.com/2024/05/223-eci-takedown-requests-hate-speech-rti/> accessed 18 May 2024.
153‘Here’s Why EC Asked AAP to Change It Poll Campaign Song’ The Economic Times (28 April 2024)<https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/elections/lok-sabha/india/heres-why-ec-asked-aap-to-change-it-poll-campaignsong/articleshow/109668263.cms?from=mdr> accessed 17 May 2024.

38

Hate speech andmisinformation on online
platforms

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

ECI has failed to meaningfully curb the proliferation of online hate and misinformation,
despite formulating a ‘Voluntary Code of Ethics’ for social media platforms to adhere toduring elections, and setting up specialised fake news monitoring units. ECI is notknown to have initiated any action regarding pro-BJP ‘shadow advertisers’ operating
outside ECI’s advertisement expenditure guidelines.

We also note with alarm that the ECI is failing dismally in its obligation to engage meaningfully
and in good faith with all stakeholders, including civil society and citizens’ groups, regarding theissues highlighted above. All the concerns raised in this report, and in our previous reports, havebeen communicated repeatedly and directly to the ECI via email, in the form of our Weekly
Bulletins.154 So far, we have not received even a single line of acknowledgement regarding any of
our complaints.
Other grievance mechanisms, such as the ECI’s CVigil app, through which ordinary citizens aresupposed to be able to register complaints, remain full of glitches and are largely non-functional,
despite ECI’s claims that it has taken action in 99.9% of reported violations.155 Attempting toengage with the ECI through the National Grievance Service Portal, which allows registered users
to flag election-related problems, has also been a futile exercise.156
The ECI has also appeared to dispense with its previous practice of organising a press conference
after the commencement of each phase of polling, with none reported since the announcement ofpoll dates in March.157
If the current state of affairs continues, the public’s faith in the institutional independence of the
ECI, as well as the independence and impartiality of individual Election Commissioners, is boundto dip even more rapidly than it already is.158 The situation has already become so dire that citizens’
groups have begun campaigns calling upon the ECI to ‘grow a spine or resign’.159 This is a matterof shame not just for the ECI, but for all Indians.

154‘Weekly
Bulletins’(Independent
Panel
for
Monitoring
IndianElection,
25
March
2024)
<https://indiaelectionmonitor.org/weeklybulletin/> accessed 18 May 2024.
155
Election Commission of India, ‘Commission’s Second Suo Motu Report on Two Month’s Enforcement of MCC during GE
2024’ (n 8); Ayush Tiwari, ‘Ordinary Voters Flagged Modi Speech to Election Commission – and Came up against a Broken
System’ Scroll.in (9 May 2024) <https://scroll.in/article/1067615/ordinary-voters-flagged-modi-speech-to-election-commissionand-came-up-against-a-broken-system> accessed 17 May 2024.
156
Ayush Tiwari, ‘Ordinary Voters Flagged Modi Speech to Election Commission – and Came up against a Broken System’ (n
155).
157
‘Release Absolute Voter Figures and Hold Press Conferences After Polling, Press Bodies Ask EC’ The Wire (11 May 2024)<https://thewire.in/government/press-bodies-letter-ec-absolute-number-voters-hold-press-conference> accessed 21 May 2024.
158
Sandeep Shastri, ‘CSDS-Lokniti 2024 Pre-Poll Survey | Level and Intensity of Voter Trust in Select Institutions and Processes’
The Hindu (11 April 2024) <https://www.thehindu.com/elections/csds-lokniti-2024-pre-poll-survey-level-and-intensity-of-votertrust-in-select-institutions-and-processes/article68054233.ece> accessed 14 April 2024.
159‘Civil Society, Citizens’ Groups Jointly Launch “Grow A Spine” Postcard Campaign against EC’ (The Indian Express, 11 May2024) <https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/bangalore/civil-society-citizens-groups-election-commission-9322192/> accessed
17 May 2024.

39

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

6. Conclusion and Call to Action
Free and fair elections form the cornerstone of democracy. The right of citizens to vote freely fora candidate of their own choice is a foundational right, reiterated multiple times as being an
indissoluble part of ‘basic structure’ of the Indian Constitution. India’s experience as one of the
few successful post-colonial democracies, and particularly its success in conducting periodic
General Elections and ensuring seamless transfers of power, are admittedly great sources of pride
for all Indians and well-wishers of India.
However, the right to vote can be said to have been exercised meaningfully and effectively only if
certain preconditions are met and monitored during the election period:•

Every eligible candidate should be allowed to stand for elections and compete forvotes without let or hindrance.
However, this report establishes that the 2024 General Election is taking place in
unprecedented circumstances. The BJP has established itself as an electoral behemoth,using unscrupulous methods to corner the lion’s share of political financing, while at thesame time ruthlessly deploying government agencies to systematically incapacitate
opposition parties and their top leadership. Its domination – and impunity – has reachedsuch a level that it has felt empowered enough to pressure opposition candidates into
withdrawing, on the eve of polling. The electoral playing field is now dangerously skewed
in favour of the BJP.

•No voter shall be discriminated against on arbitrary grounds such as religion.
However, this report establishes that the 2024 GE has already been marred byunprecedented levels of state-led voter suppression, including using violence, against
Muslims. Such reports, all from BJP-ruled states, along with previous measures like the
NRC and the disenfranchisement of D-voters in Assam, are widespread enough for us toconclude that a pattern of systematic, state-led voter exclusion has now emerged against
India’s Muslims.

•

The election process should be free of violence, intimidation, forcible prevention of
voting, and other irregularities.
During the 2024 GE, violence by armed extremists has mandated re-polling in Manipur,
while BJP followers across the country have been found to have engaged in a wide rangeof irregularities, including bogus voting and voter intimidation. Such violations are not
new to Indian elections, but diminish the ECI’s claim that the 2024 GE has, overall, been
‘violence free, less noisy, less cluttered and intrusive, free of inducement andostentatiousness’.

40

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024•

Candidates engaging in hate-speech and demonising communities should beappropriately penalised.
Religious polarisation and communal fearmongering are not new to Indian electoral
campaigns. In fact, they have been central planks upon which the BJP has achieved its
electoral domination. This report establishes that what has stood out during the 2024 GE
has been the party’s singular reliance on sectarian appeal from the start of the campaign,and the role of the senior-most political leaders in this othering, indeed dehumanisation, ofMuslims. Never before has the use of communal slurs and the use of Hindu symbols been
so stark, and never before has the ECI allowed the purveyors of communal fearmongering
to enjoy such impunity.

•

Votes should be cast-as-intended, recorded-as-cast, and counted-as-recorded.
As this report establishes, the 2024 GE is taking place against the backdrop of the ECI and
the SC failing to adequately and in good faith engage with fundamental concerns about thereliability and integrity of official machinery used in the voting process, namely the EVMVVPAT system. The ECI’s belligerent refusal to divulge the total number of votes cast so
far is only bound to fuel these concerns, and raise fears about potential manipulation on
counting day.

•Electoral management bodies should take appropriate action if opposition parties andcivil society organisations bring electoral malpractices to its notice.
As this report establishes, the ECI has functioned like a virtual arm of the government,
appearing to pussyfoot around major violations of the MCC and other legal provisions by
the BJP, while acting with alacrity against opposition parties. It has also kept media andcivil society at arm’s length.

None of the basic pre-conditions for free and fair elections, then, appear to be completely met,
greatly diminishing the portrayal of the 2024 General Election as a ‘festival of democracy’. We
remind the Election Commission that the legitimacy of any party that claims the right to form thegovernment will be seriously compromised, unless the Election Commission addresses various
derelictions that have been brought to its attention, and penalizes the wrongdoer, howsoever highan office she or he commands. The future of democracy in India is at stake.

41

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Annexure #1: Case Study – Rampur Parliamentary Constituency, Uttar
Pradesh(Preliminary) Summary evidence table – of alleged violations of Conduct of Election Rules
1961, Returning Officers Handbook, 2023, and Manual on Electronic Voting Machines,
2023(Source: Mehmood Pracha, Independent candidate, Rampur PC)
Chapter /Section49(B)
10.1.510.1.5 (j)10.1.610.8
12.2.2.
12.3.212.5.

12.5.2.

12.5.7.
2.5.9.
12.7.

Description

Summary of violations

Conduct of Election Rules, 1961
Seal of Returning Officer (RO) on
All slips were similar, without signature of RO, but only stamps
Ballot Unit and Control Unit
Returning Officer’s Handbook, 2023
Returning Officer (RO) obligations
RO did not make time for meetings with candidates or addressed
any issues.
Organize comprehensive andTraining not comprehensive
exhaustive training of pollingpersonnel and police personnel
Returning Officer should meet the
RO not giving any meetings or addressing any issues.
contesting candidates
Training of Polling staff
Officials at training centre claim no one sought any training.
Taking out EVMs and VVPATS for
No list of EVMs for awareness purpose supplied to candidate.
awareness and training
Security and handling ofNo proper escort at the time of transport of machines.
EVM/VVPATs
Commissioning of EVMs and• Written intimation provided to candidates was contradictory
VVPATSand misleading,•No intimation was given regarding number of representatives
allowed, until the candidate flagged it
Arrangements in the premises of• Preparation hall was over crowded
preparation of EVM/VVPATs• Election officials did not handle EVMs, being on makeshift
spots• Several unattended EVM machines•Mobile phones and electronics used by all and sundry, affecting
privacy/confidentiality• Entry and exist into the room without security•BUs were already being sealed by election officials prior toarrival of Engineers, and Engineers were unaware and divided as
to the source of Symbol Loading Unit (SLU)
Safe custody of Symbol Loading
BEL Engineers gave different / contradictory statements
Unit
regarding the origin of SLUs
Supervision of the preparation
Commissioning and preparation of EVMs done by officials
while Engineers were at District Magistrate’s (DM) office with
officials of the district administration.
Safe preservation of prepared EVMs No armed security was present with EVMs at several stages.
and VVPAT42

12.7.2.
12.9.
12.9.1.
13.55.

1.1.
1.2
1.3.2
1.4
6.1.

The strong room

Dispersal of machines was haphazard and unsupervised.
Machines were dispersed from Mandi itself, not from strong
rooms.
Supply of EVMs & VVPATs to
Dispersal of machines was haphazard and unsupervised, and topolling parties, and their dispersal
random officials, not to Presiding Officers of polling stations.
Safe custody of EVMs and VVPAT
Sealing of machines and boxes, along with other election
after pollmaterial such as envelopes, mock poll material, etc., undertaken
in open grounds at the venue for deposit of machines, when all
such activities ought to have been done at the Polling Stations
before the machines being removed from the polling stations
Manual on Electronic Voting Machines, August 2023
Various types of EVM storages:
There were only two designated places for storage of EVMs, i.e.
the warehouse at the DM office, and the Mandi
Physical Aspects of the EVM
Strong room not secured. Multiple entry points, no sealing ofWarehouse/Strong Room:
any windows or doors using brick-masonry or concrete.
Security & Safety arrangements forOpen and unregulated ingress and egress
EVM Warehouse/strong room:
Transportation/Shifting of EVMs
Open condition of trucks in which EVMs were transported fromthe warehouse at Collectorate.
Election Period
No security or armed police at the warehouse at DM office.
Open entry and exit, and multiple entry points

Chapter 8

EVMs, and Symbol Loading Unit

8.4.6.

Safe custody of Symbol Loading
Unit
Supervision of the preparation
Dispersal of EVMs

8.4.8.
Chapter 9

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

• Open ingress and egress without any frisking• Election officials on makeshift spots with EVMs
• Mobile phones and electronics were being used by all andsundryNo security or Armed police at warehouse, open entry and exit,
and multiple entry points.
• Multiple entry points for warehouse, no sealing of any
windows or doors using brick-masonry or concrete.
Interview with BEL Engineers, gave different statements
regarding the origin of SLU
EVMs were being handled without any supervision• Dispersal of machines was haphazard and unsupervised.
• Lack of any supervision or segmentation of EVMs at the timeof dispersal.

43

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Annexure #2: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 4 (11 April – 17 April,
2024)
This is the third of our weekly catalogue of concerns about the integrity of 2024 general election (GE). As
the Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections, 2024, we have been observing the 2024 GE process
and publishing our findings, periodically. The bulletin is meant to raise emergent concerns, directly with theElection Commission of India (ECI), in the hope that these are addressed speedily, also as a record of ourconcerns. (See our website for all weekly bulletins we had shared with the ECI previously.)

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders’ appeal to religion for votes
•

•

•
•

As pointed out in our previous report, appeals to religion, some direct and explicit, continue to bemade by BJP leaders, in violation of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and the Representation of
People’s Act. The MCC bars appeals to “caste or communal feelings for securing votes” andprohibits the use of places of religious worship as “forum for election propaganda”. According to
RPA, appeal to religion is a ‘corrupt practice’.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has invoked religious symbolism in multiple speeches, mostrecently saying that opposition leaders consume meat and fish to hurt the sentiments of the public,
and labelling it as “Mughal” mentality. Along with these implicit appeals, he has also used religion
explicitly for election campaigning by saying in speeches that the opposition has “insulted” Lord
Ram.
Home Minister Amit Shah has similarly referenced Ram Temple in Ayodhya and the festival of
Ram Navami, Hindu god, Ram’s birth, in his election speech. (15:07-16:11 in the linked video)
BJP Lok Sabha candidate Kangana Ranaut in an election speech in Kullu, Himachal Pradesh,blatantly invoked religion and Hindu Rashtra (State) by mentioning “the spark of Sanatan Dharm,
Hindu Rashtra, religion was awakened in our consciousness by Narendra Modi in 2014” and bycomparing PM Modi with Lord Ram.

Targeting of political opponents by central agencies
The targeting of political opponents by central agencies continues as before. In the latest instance, the Kerala
High Court has asked the Enforcement Directorate to refrain from summoning opposition candidate Isaac
Thomas during election time, calling it “not proper”.
Election Commission of India (ECI) continues to be unresponsive over Electronic Voting Machines(EVMs) and MCC•••

Despite multiple complaints and concerns expressed by a wide section of civil society, ECI has not
responded to questions surrounding the safety of EVMs. The Central Information Commission has
now expressed “severe displeasure” over ECI failing to respond to a Right to Information request
regarding the EVMs.
ECI has taken no action over multiple complaints about MCC violations, such as those pointed (1).
Videos of such speeches are widely available on social media but the ECI has not taken notice.
ECI has also not been reported to take note of the widespread instance of central agencies issuing
notices/raiding/arresting Opposition candidates during election time, and thus seeming to be malafide – impacting the level playing field44

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Annexure #3: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 5 (18 April – 24 April,
2024)
This is the fifth of our weekly catalogue of concerns about the integrity of 2024 general election (GE). As the
Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections, 2024, we have been observing the 2024 GE process andpublishing our findings, periodically. The bulletin is meant to raise emergent concerns, directly with theElection Commission of India (ECI), in the hope that these are addressed speedily, also as a record of ourconcerns. (See our website for all weekly bulletins we had shared with the ECI previously.)

Senior BJP leaders systematically seeking votes in the name of religion, often inciting hate against
minorities
Making appeals to religion to seek votes goes against India’s secular constitution and disadvantages India’s
minorities. The time around the festival of Ram Navami saw multiple violations of the Model Code of
Conduct (MCC) with mostly ruling BJP leaders making clear appeals to religion as part of their election
campaign.
•

•

•
•

•
•
•

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in a brazenly communal statement on 21 April that is full ofIslamophobic rant and dog-whistle, falsely claimed that the Congress party promised to takepeople’s wealth and give it to the Muslims, who he refereed as “infiltrators” and “those with morechildren”. Apart from the disinformation about Congress’s manifesto promises and a speech byformer Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the speech is a direct incitement to hatred and hostility
against India’s Muslims. Besides being a major violation of the relevant penal provisions and theRepresentation of People’s Act, it also violates the MCC. Thousands of citizens and various former
civil servants have written to the ECI to take action according to domestic law, against the PM for
this violation.
Blatant MCC violation by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), whose Bihar unit posted an image on
X asking voters to remember “who got the Ram Temple made” while going to vote, on voting day
on 19 April. Unambiguously invoking Lord Ram in this manner is tantamount to Hindu
majoritarianism.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi used the religious slogan ‘Jai Shri Ram’ in an election speech in
Assam.
PM Modi’s X account also posted a video showing Lord Ram, the Ram Temple, and the PM
performing religious worship. The video begins with the text ‘Ramkaj se Rashtrakaj’ (from thework of Ram to the work of the nation). Such videos evoke religious sentiment and distract citizens
from the challenges facing the citizen and national security.
Union Minister Smriti Irani shared a video on her X account showing multiple images of temples
and religious activities, among others, with the caption #PhirEkBaarModiSarkar.
Such electoral mobilization sets a bad precedent for the political opposition. The Lok Sabha
candidate for the Trinamool Congress (TMC) from Howra in Bengal conducted a Ram Navami
Shobhayatra as part of his election campaign.
These are just a few of the examples of the blatant use of religion to secure votes. Many social
media users have been actively tagging the Election Commission of India (ECI) in videos of such
violations, but the ECI has not taken action to ensure that religion and caste are not used to ask forvotes.

45

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Polling day violations from first-phase constituencies•••

Opposition parties have alleged that state authorities in constituencies in Uttar Pradesh, including
Rampur, Moradabad, Nagina, Muzaffarnagar, were preventing some voters from casting their voteor intentionally delaying the process, and alleged booth capturing.
Videos have also surfaced on social media with journalists reporting vandalisation of polling booths
in Manipur.
The high voter turnout in Manipur notwithstanding, there have been reports and allegations ofproxy voting, vandalism, firing, armed groups preventing people from voting, and damaging ofElectronic Voting Machines (EVMs).

Suppression of opposition and questions of level-playing field••

Civil society actors have highlighted and raised complaints with the ECI regarding undue pressure
being put on voters by the state machinery in the constituency of Gandhinagar, in favour of the BJP
candidate and Home Minister Amit Shah.
A BJP candidate was declared the winner on the Surat Lok Sabha seat when nomination papers of
the Congress candidate were rejected. All other candidates on the ballot curiously withdrew theirnominations. One of the candidates, from the BSP, has alleged that BJP pressured candidates towithdraw their nominations. This raises concerns about the sanctity of elections and unfair means
being used to suppress opposition candidates.

Continued concerns over EVMs
As highlighted in previous reports, the concerns over EVMs are continuing. While the matter is in theSupreme Court and the ECI recently stated that allegations of EVMs incorrectly logging votes in favour of
the BJP were false, we reiterate that it is extremely important for the ECI to instil high public faith in theefficacy of the EVMs and the ECI as an impartial body. Survey findings show that this is not the case.

46

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Annexure #4: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 6 (25 April – 1 May, 2024)
This is the sixth of our weekly catalogue of concerns about the integrity of 2024 general election (GE). As
the Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections, 2024, we have been observing the 2024 GE process
and publishing our findings, periodically. The bulletin is meant to raise emergent concerns, directly with theElection Commission of India (ECI), in the hope that these are addressed speedily, also as a record of ourconcerns. (See our website for all weekly bulletins we had shared with the ECI previously.)

Failure of the Election Commission of India (ECI) to adequately respond to anti-Muslim hateviolating the Model Code of Conduct (MCC)
Following complaints against Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s incendiary speech of 21 April, the ECI sent
notices to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) President without mentioning PM Modi’s name or his speech.
The usual practice is to send notice to the individual against whom the complaint is made. By sidestepping
the specific allegation against the PM, the ECI is failing to effectively answer complaints and not taking
proper action. At the time of writing this report, there was no news of any further action taken by the ECIon the hate speech.
Continued MCC violations by BJP leaders using religion for votes
Despite public disapproval and concerns raised by opposition parties and civil society, politicians from the
BJP continue to appeal to religious sentiments to seek votes. This is in violation of the MCC, which prevents
appeal to caste or religious feelings, as well as India’s penal code and election laws. Some emblematic cases
include:••••PM Modi continuing to invoke religious identities along with use of dogwhistles against Muslims
and raising the Ram Temple in his speeches.
BJP President JP Nadda repeating the communal disinformation that the Congress wants toallegedly give the rights of Scheduled Castes to Muslims.
BJP Minister Anurag Thakur making another version of the same remark alleging that the Congress
Party wanted to give their children’s property to Muslims.
The BJP’s Instagram account posted an extremely Islamophobic and anti-Muslim video, painting
Muslims as terrorists, invaders, and robbers and again falsely claiming that the Congress wanted to
seize resources of non-Muslims and give it to Muslims. The video has now been deleted from theInstagram account.

Unequal application of MCC across political parties
The ECI also seems to be applying the MCC unequally across political parties. The ECI has asked the Aam
Aadmi Party (AAP) to modify its campaign song and has raised objections to some lines and visuals. The
ECI has the authority to assess campaign material of all parties. However, by not taking firm action against
explicit appeals to religion made by BJP leaders and by going exclusively after opposition parties’ campaign
material, which do not prima facie violate the MCC, the ECI gives the impression that it is not applying the
MCC fairly to all parties. AAP is especially disadvantaged in carrying out election campaigning as its leader
and the sitting Chief Minister of Delhi and other Ministers are currently in jail, accused in a money
laundering case.
Opposition candidates withdrawing nominations under pressure on suspicious grounds
After the BJP candidate from Surat won “unopposed” when opposition candidates were rejected orwithdrew their nominations, it has been reported that the Congress candidate from Indore withdrew his
nomination and joined the BJP. The Congress has alleged that the candidate was threatened and had thepolice register a case of murder against him, thereby forcing him to withdraw his candidacy and join the
BJP instead. It is a matter of grave concern that opposition candidates are withdrawing, or being forced to47

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

withdraw, under suspicious circumstances, before polling. ECI needs to ensure that the ruling party andadministrative authorities are not using covert means to browbeat the opposition. This is the only way toensure free and fair elections, and a level playing field.
Reports of voter suppression and intimidation
Media reports have highlighted instances of voters, especially from minority communities, not being
allowed or able to vote. This was the case of Muslim voters in Mathura who claim that they found theirnames deleted from the voters’ list when they presented themselves to cast their vote. Earlier, videos had
surfaced on social media about state authorities causing delays in Muslim voters being allowed to vote. The
right to freely cast one’s vote is a basic right of all citizens, and denying this right is a gross violation.
Excessive delay in release and partial disclosure of voter turnout data
The ECI took 11 days after the first phase and four days after the second phase of voting to release the final
voter turnout data. Not only is this delay concerning and has yet to be explained by the ECI, the Commission
has also not released the total number of registered voters and number of polled votes from eachconstituency to date. It has merely released percentages, which do not give the full picture, and this lack oftransparency has caused concern among opposition political parties and observers with regard to thepotential for manipulation of votes during counting.
Failure of the existing structural mechanism in the conduct of elections to safeguard adherence toConstitutional principles
Given the inability of the Election Commission of India (ECI) to respond to gross allegations of violationsof both the Model Code of Conduct and numerous violations of the Constitution of India, all of which havebeen brought to their attention by IPMIE, it is becoming increasingly clear to us that electoral reforms,
including to relevant parts of the Constitution and electoral laws might be required to safeguard the integrityof the electoral process in India, so crucial for defence of democracy. We plan to look at this question in
greater detail, and make concrete recommendations in future reports we publish.

48

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Annexure #5: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 7 (2 - 8 May, 2024)
This is the seventh of our weekly catalogue of concerns about the integrity of 2024 general election (GE). As
the Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections, 2024, we have been observing the 2024 GE process
and publishing our findings, periodically. The bulletin is meant to raise emergent concerns, directly with theElection Commission of India (ECI), in the hope that these are addressed speedily, also as a record of ourconcerns. (See our website for all weekly bulletins we had shared with the ECI previously.)

Continued appeals to religious polarisation for the purpose of seeking votes
The concerning trend of politicians resorting to religious appeals to seek votes continues unabated, in
violation of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC). The Election Commission of India (ECI) has failed atensuring this does not happen and that the MCC is upheld.
•

•

•
•
•

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has repeatedly made multiple communal remarks in his election
speeches, targeting the entire Muslim community, and continues to use anti-Muslim dog-whistle
frequently in his campaign speeches, including mention of Pakistan, and false allegations that theCongress plans to take reservations from the Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), andOther Backward Classes (OBCs) and give it to Muslims. In a speech he further asked to voters todecide between “Ram Rajya” and “vote jihad”.
Despite multiple complaints lodged with the Election Commission of India (ECI) against PM
Modi’s hate speeches, there is no news of ECI having acted against him per rules under
Representation of People’s (RPA) Act and the Model Code Conduct (MCC).
Karnataka BJP’s official social media account posted a video demonising Muslims, triggering
several complaints being lodged with the ECI, by opposition parties, among others. Rather thanacting against the BJP, under RPA Act and MCC, ECI has written to X to take down the antiMuslim video, but only after voting had concluded in Karnataka.
BJP Member of Parliament (MP) Arvind Dharmapuri shared a hateful video on his X account,which vilified Muslims and repeated the allegation that the Congress plans to take existing
reservations away and give it to Muslims.
BJP MP Navneet Rana raised religious slogans in an election rally, saying those who wanted to live
in India must say “Jai Shri Ram” and the others could go to Pakistan, and asked for votes in thename of Lord Ram.
Maria Alam of the Samajwadi Party in an election speech in Uttar Pradesh called on Muslims toremove the current government by “vote jihad”.

Spreading of misinformation in election campaigning••

PM Modi, in addition to repeatedly alleging that the Congress wants to give reservations on purely
religious basis, has also stated multiple times that the Congress wants to impose a 55% inheritancetax if voted to power, whereas nothing of the sort has been mentioned in the opposition’s manifesto
or speeches.
A doctored video of Home Minister Amit Shah claiming that the BJP government will end
reservations for SCs, STs, and OBCs if voted to power was shared on social media. A case was
filed against Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy, whose lawyer has denied the charge that
Reddy shared this video.

Suppression of voter choice•

Following reports from Surat and Indore where opposition candidates were either rejected orwithdrew, opposition candidates from Gandhinagar – where Amit Shah is contesting from the BJP

49•

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

– have alleged intimidation and pressure to withdraw by local BJP politicians and the state police.
Similar pressure have been reported from Indore in Madhya Pradesh. Such pressures by the rulingparty, if true, undermines the very act of democratic elections.
Media reports have shown that names of around 700 fishermen, mostly Muslims, whose homes inGandhvi and Navadra villages of Gujarat were demolished last year, have been removed from thevoter list, thereby disenfranchising them.

Questions over release of voter turnout data by the ECI
As highlighted in our previous report, the ECI made an excessive delay in releasing the voter turnout data
for the first two phases of voting. Opposition leaders, a former Chief Election Commissioner, and civilsociety continue to raise questions about this delay and the fact that data related to number of votes polled
per constituency has not been released. The ECI has not responded to these accusations. This casts
aspersions over the transparency of the electoral process, which is essential for a free and fair election.
Civil society prevented from interacting with foreign election observers
The panel also takes serious note of reports of election authorities not allowing civil society groups tointeract with members of foreign election management bodies / political parties that seem to be observing
general election 2024. There have been news circulating for sometime, of BJP inviting political parties fromoverseas to observe Lok Sabha elections. The ECI in its press note of 7 May 2024 reported “during phase
3, 75 international delegates from 23 countries visited many polling stations in 6 states to witness the poll
process”, going on to claim that the observers “commend(ed) India’s electoral processes”. It is not clear if
the delegates that the ECI was reporting on were the same as those that the BJP had invited. If so, this itself
is problematic. What is further concerning is that domestic election monitoring groups who tried to meetwith the foreign observers, to share their insights, were reportedly prevented from doing so. This does notbode well for transparency and electoral integrity.

50

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Annexure #6: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 8 (9 - 15 May, 2024)
This is the eighth of our weekly catalogue of concerns about the integrity of 2024 general election (GE). As
the Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections, 2024, we have been observing the 2024 GE process
and publishing our findings, periodically. The bulletin is meant to raise emergent concerns, directly with theElection Commission of India (ECI), in the hope that these are addressed speedily, also as a record of ourconcerns. (See our website for all bulletins we had shared with the ECI previously.)

Continued minority-baiting and appeals to religion, to seek votes
As reported in previous bulletins and across media platforms, the religiously-driven campaign of the ruling
BJP continues unabated. Appeals to religion are explicitly against the Model Code of Conduct.
••

A day after PM Modi was reported having walked back his claim of the Congress party distributing
the nation’s wealth to ‘infiltrators’ and those ‘with many children’, understood as his reference toMuslims, he was reported making the false claim again, in a public rally in Maharashtra, of theCongress party working exclusively to benefit Muslims, ‘its favourite vote bank’!
Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath remarked in an election speech, “Muslims eat beef
to tease” Hindus and that the Congress wants to give Muslims the freedom to eat beef. ● In anotherelection rally, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma promised that that BJP would build
Krishna Janmabhoomi temple in Mathura and Baba Vishwanath temple in place of the Gyanvapi
Mosque in Varanasi, if it won 400 seats.

Suppression of minority and Dalit voters by state authorities••

There have been several reports of authorities in several districts in Uttar Pradesh that went to thepolls in the 3rd and 4th phases, preventing voters in predominantly Muslim localities from voting,either by deletion of names from electoral rolls, or by police physically preventing voting. Suchincidents have been reported from Rampur, Moradabad and Mathura, among others. Dalit voters
have also faced similar obstruction. Such actions violate voters’ right to vote, besides disrupt a levelplaying field by targeting regions where opposition parties might be politically strong.
In the Sambhal parliamentary constituency, police was reported entering polling booths, snatchingaway voters’ documents, and detaining and beating up voters.

Polling day violations and misbehaviour by politicians, against minorities
There have been reports of candidates abusing their position and violating guidelines on their conduct on
voting day, including in polling booths.
••

On May 13, BJP candidate from Hyderabad constituency, Madhavi Latha, was reported entering apolling booth and found checking the documents of Muslim women voters, including asking themto show their faces by removing their veils. These are duties of election staff, and candidate haveno authority to perform such actions. A case has been registered against Latha. She was earlier
reported gesturing to shoot an imaginary arrow aimed at a mosque in Hyderabad.
BJP MP from Nizamabad constituency Arvind Dharmapuri too was seen inside a polling boothseeming to threaten the presiding officer and women Muslim voters casting their ballots.

Election advertising in newspapers on voting day
It has been reported on social media that election advertisements by the BJP were published in prominent
Hindi newspapers in Jharkhand on 13 May, the day of polling, even though campaigning on voting day,and 48 hours prior, violates the Model Code of Conduct.
Election Commission of India (ECI) failing to uphold electoral laws, codes and procedures

51

•
•

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

ECI is yet to take any action per law, against BJP politicians, including PM Modi and other seniorleaders, on complaints of appealing to religion to seek votes, and for hate speech against minorities,
all in violation of MCC and RPA Act.
Concerns continue to persist about the non-disclosure by ECI of information on the number of votes
polled in the first three phases of the elections. So far ECI has only released percentages andestimates, rather than absolute numbers. In response to a formal complaint by the President of theCongress party, ECI was reported providing an inadequate response – which was also criticised in
the media for not answering the questions raised by the opposition. Prominent members of civilsociety have petitioned the ECI to release the crucial data. Their attempt for a physical meeting tosubmit their complaint in person, was reportedly rebuffed by the ECI. ECI claims that they are notrequired to provide voter turnout data. This is not only against established practice, but also against
the principle of transparency, central to public trust in electoral integrity. We hope that the Supreme
Court, that has agreed to hear application sitting before it on the matter, on 17th of May, will act toaddress this stalemate. The ECI needs to act impartially and also appear to do the same. Suchviolations of established practice are worrisome.

52

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

Annexure #7: Weekly bulletin of key concerns, No. 9 (9 - 15 May, 2024)
This is the ninth of our weekly catalogue of concerns about the integrity of 2024 general election (GE). As
the Independent Panel for Monitoring Indian Elections, 2024, we have been observing the 2024 GE process
and publishing our findings, periodically. The bulletin is meant to raise emergent concerns, also directly with
the Election Commission of India (ECI), in the hope that these are addressed speedily, also as a record of
our concerns. (See our website for all weekly bulletins we had shared with the ECI previously.)

Polling day complaints and irregularities in the fifth phase
Over 200 complaints regarding voter suppression, violations of campaigning rules, and malfunction of Electronic
Voting Machines (EVMs) among others, were reported from Uttar Pradesh. Incidents of violence were also reported
from constituencies in Bengal. Videos that went viral showed a minor in Farrukhabad, son a of a Panchayat head,casting vote in favour of BJP, eight times, and spreading it on his social media account. The Panel is satisfied to notethat the state chief electoral officer has recommended repoll in the specific polling station.
Communal statements and hate speech
As highlighted in previous reports, elections underway continue to be marred by the use of religious rhetoric andcommunal hate speech, especially by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), to seek votes, in complete violation of theRepresentation of People’s Act and Model Code of Conduct (MCC).
● Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh (UP), Yogi Adityanath, declared in an election rally that his government had madesure people (implying Muslims) do not offer prayers in streets, and that loudspeakers have come off mosques. He madeno reference to religious observance by those from other communities, that also took over roads and public spaces anduse of loudspeakers. Adityanath also claimed, wrongly, that the opposition planned to impose an inheritance tax andhand over a portion of people’s properties to Muslims, Rohingyas, Bangladeshis, Pakistanis and Afghans. Similar lies
deploying anti-Muslim tropes were repeated by him in yet another election rally.
Election Commission of India (ECI) continuing to fail to deliver• ECI refusing to provide voter turnout data
The ECI has still not revealed data related to numbers of total voters and total votes polled in each constituency in thephases that have been completed so far. The Chief Election Officer of Puducherry, in response to a Right to Information(RTI) query, has stated that this data will be released only after the elections are over. A former Chief Election
Commissioner has stated why there is no reason for such a delay.
• ECI’s ineffective application of MCC rules
Confirming past trends, ECI seems to continue to be applying the MCC unequally across political parties, letting theruling BJP get away with violations while sending notices to opposition parties. A report dated 12 May showed thatout of 16 notices over MCC violations, the ECI issued only 3 to the ruling BJP despite there being ample evidence of
the use of religious appeal by its senior leaders for seeking votes. The ECI had recently sent a notice jointly to the BJP
and the Congress respectively asking its respective “star campaigners” not to make communal statements, and to refrainfrom claiming that the Constitution risked being abolished. However, the ECI is still to send notices to individual
members of the BJP, including PM Modi and CM Adityanath, for the widely circulated communal speeches they
continue to make.
Citizens’ mobilisation in light of failures of the ECI
As general election 2024 grinds on towards conclusion, there is growing concerns among citizens that ECI is failingin its duty, having become a handmaiden of the ruling party. These worries, along with unresolved concerns about
EVM manipulation, and lack of transparency about voter data, are now transforming into fears of possible manipulationof votes on counting day. Over 120 civil society organisations came together recently to mobilise themselves into a

53

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024

citizen’s vigilance commission given the ECI’s failure in satisfactorily responding to repeated MCC violations and inreleasing adequate voting relate data. The ECI’s failures have caused great concern among political observers and civilsociety about the lack of transparency over crucial election-related data and the possibility of manipulation of votes on
counting day.

54

indiaelectionmonitor.org

2nd Interim Report – GE 2024