Tirunellai Narayana Iyer Seshan
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
A brief biography
Nov 11, 2019: The Times of India
T N Seshan showed politicians the real power of the Election Commission of India.
A 1955 batch IAS officer of the Tamil Nadu cadre, Tirunellai Narayana Iyer Seshan served in various capacities, including as cabinet secretary of India in 1989 and earlier as administrative head of Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro).
It was, however, as the 10th chief election commissioner from December 12, 1990, till December 11, 1996 that he got national and international acclaim. He became a household name when he studied and utilised the powers of CEC to the fullest.
EC turned into guardian of poll system under Seshan’s watch
TN Seshan elevated Nirvachan Sadan to the public profile it now enjoys as guardian of India’s electoral system. He used the EC powers to direct an election, including transfers and postings of officials to crack the whip on corrupt electoral practices. This sent a stern message to officials and brought home to political parties that they could not count on servile officials to bend election rules. “T N Seshan was a legend. He will always be a source of inspiration to us and all CECs and ECs to come,” said CEC Sunil Arora.
Seshan frequently clashed with the P V Narasimha Rao government and was outspoken in his comments, which was quite a difference from his stint as a senior IAS officer. His actions won him widespread public support.
The Rao government used a little known clause of the law governing the EC to appoint two additional commissioners. This did stymie Seshan to some extent and he even went to Tirupati to meditate and seeks answers to the government strategem. He later told the media that the Lord had remained silent.
Seshan won the Ramon Magsaysay Award for his services to the government in 1996.
Electoral reforms
TN Seshan, June 28, 2023: The Times of India
The responsibility of a CEC [chief election commissioner] is not only to run the electoral process efficiently but also to identify and implement ways and means by which the electoral process would improve. In fact, one aspect of the responsibility cannot be separated from the other and therefore in everything I did as the CEC, there was always a lookout for opportunities to reform. And, of course, I believed in doing my work efficiently and with favour to none. As I have indicated earlier, it started with setting the environment within the commission in proper order while improving on efficiency and discipline. And then came the symbols cases and the related processes. Though these were handled according to law, the situation did improvise as we went along, be it through case laws or through managing the symbols better. The election process itself provided many opportunities, and much of the early improvements were focused on better implementation of the laws.
I also took special steps, exclusively focused at reforming the process. The first year, 1991, gave me ample opportunities to study the loopholes in the system in detail. It was not that this insight was not already available with the commission, but a comprehensive view was taken now. We listed different ways in which the integrity of the election was being compromised. This ranged from impersonation while voting, collusion of polling staff with contestants, the use of muscle power, to illegal use of government machinery, and so on. The list had 150 items. Even after conducting many elections, I still had a list of 150 possible defects in Indian elections.
Some of the defects were repairable by what the ECI [Election Commission of India] could do. Others were curable only if Parliament would change the laws. There were some that were treatable only if the political parties and individuals would change their character.
In respect to one set of defects, I needed to go to the government. A booklet had been printed and forwarded to the government in February 1992. This 34-page document contained a set of ECI proposals for electoral reforms. In nine chapters, it dealt with various aspects of elections, ranging from the delimitation of constituencies, of preparing electoral rolls, to the actual process of election and declaration of results.
Each chapter discussed various issues pertaining to organisational structure, disciplinary powers, code of conduct, security and so on. The document even detailed who should do what to affect the proposed reforms and what laws or rules should be changed by Parliament in each case.
The government did precious little about it. Let alone make a reply, the government did not even send an acknowledgement. Even two years later, when I spoke about the suggested reforms and the inaction of the government at countless public gatherings, the government did not take up the matter.
This did not mean that the entire exercise of documenting the suggested reforms had no benefits. It did make a difference in the ECI’s approach to the challenges obstructing free and fair elections. It helped the commission define and visualise its goal, and sharpened its focus. Beginning in late 1992, I had used every legitimate means at my disposal to fine-tune the processes involved in elections in the country, so that loopholes could be plugged, and free and fair polls could be conducted.
It took a good team, a great deal of ingenuity and consistent work. In the latter half of 1993, a total of nine states, including a large part of the Hindi belt, went for elections, so it was generally termed as mini general elections. At the end of these mini general elections, the general report was that it was one of the most peaceful elections, despite the fact that one of the states that went to polls was the ‘difficult’ Uttar Pradesh. The commission received a great deal of praise for the handling of this election.
The actual election work is done by millions of ordinary Indians who diligently work, whether as security personnel, as poll booth staff, counting staff, enumerators, etc. Then there was the good work of my staff in the commission itself. All in all, the team worked well, and finally the newspapers agreed too without any reservations.
The Pioneer on November 23, 1993 had an editorial titled ‘Thank You, Mr Seshan’. An article in The Statesman , dated December 17, 1993, read: [...] Though the ruling party is recalling the Frankenstein parallel [for appointing Seshan], what is frustrating most political parties is perhaps the fact that the CEC is yet to provide the Parliament with a cause justified enough to constitutionally move an impeachment motion against him. Here is an extraordinary man who, for a change, is exercising the authority that a CEC, though empowered to, has perhaps seldom exercised before [...] India Today , in its article dated December 15, 1993, reflected violence- related statistics in its article, showing a near 80% fall in booth capturing and 90% fall in deaths in comparison to the data for the 1991 elections. It went on to read: [...] Seshan’s big stick clearly motivated the police forces in all the states going to the polls to wield their own sticks with more than the usual zeal and uncharacteristic good judgement. In Uttar Pradesh alone, some 50,000 history-sheeters were given the choice of filing for anticipatory bail or facing preventive detention. More spectacularly, in Himachal Pradesh, at least 18 gunmen of errant Punjab ministers were stopped and disarmed while crossing the state border on polling day.
1970s: ISRO days
Arun Ram, Nov 12, 2019: The Times of India
About two decades before he became famous as the chief election commissioner who taught politicians to behave, T N Seshan was busy helping India make its first giant strides in space science.
As administrative director of the Indian Space Research Organisation in 1970s, Seshan drafted the contract signed with SEP, a company that worked for French space agency CNES, to develop Vikas, India’s first liquid propulsion engine. The engine continues to power Isro’s PSLVs and GSLVs used for missions, including Chandrayaan and Mangalyaan.
It was a tough deal to strike as India had no money to offer. Seshan drafted a contract that offered the French Indian engineering manhours for a fraction of the global cost in return for equal ownership of the technology. S Nambinarayanan, who led the 50-member Isro team at SEP, remembers Seshan dictating the 50-odd page “tricky contract” in one go. “This man was extraordinary,” he says.
Seshan was a shrewd negotiator too. After the joint venture took off, Roy Gibson, chairman of the European Space Agency, reviewed contracts of member agencies to ensure countries did not use rocket technology for military purposes. He wanted SEP to change a part of a clause that said Isro should use the technology ‘for its own use’ to ‘for its own peaceful use’.
“Seshan put his foot down: If this contract is annulled, India will rethink several other contracts that are lucrative for European companies,” said Narayanan. ESA relented. Seshan respected well-meaning bosses and wielded his authority like a sword.
