Model Code of Conduct (MCC)

Syllabus: Salient features of the Representation of People’s Act

About MCC

• Consensus document among political parties to regulate conduct during elections.
• Helps Election Commission fulfill Article 324 mandate: supervise and conduct free, fair elections to Parliament and State Legislatures.
• Operational period: From election schedule announcement to result declaration.
• Restrictions During MCC
  • The government cannot announce financial grants, promise construction projects (roads, facilities).
  • Cannot make ad hoc appointments in government or public undertakings.
• Enforceability
  • No statutory backing but strictly enforced by Election Commission.
  • Certain provisions enforced via IPC 1860, CrPC 1973, Representation of People’s Act 1951.

Evolution of MCC

• 1960: Kerala was first state to adopt election code covering processions, rallies, speeches. 
• 1974: ECI released formal MCC; set up district-level bodies for implementation.
  • Pre-1977: MCC guided only parties and candidates. 
• 1979: Revised MCC included ruling parties after EC observed power misuse (monopolizing public spaces, using public money for ads). Seven parts added, including rules for ruling parties post-election announcement. 
• 2014: Last revision undertaken

MCC Structure (Post-1979)

• Part I: General conduct for candidates and parties. 
• Parts II & III: Rules for public meetings and processions. 
• Parts IV & V: Guidelines for polling day and polling booth behavior.

Key Provisions

• General Conduct
  • No activity aggravating caste, community, religious, linguistic differences or causing tension.
  • Section 123(3), RPA 1951: Prohibits using religion, race, caste, community, language to promote enmity/hatred.
  • Criticism of other parties limited to policies, performance, initiatives — no personal attacks.
• Meetings and Processions
  • Parties must inform local police of meeting venue and time for security arrangements.
  • If multiple candidates plan processions on same route, parties must coordinate to avoid clashes.
  • Carrying/burning effigies of other party members prohibited.
• Polling Day
  • Only voters and those with valid EC pass allowed in polling booths.
  • Authorized party workers must have badges/identity cards.
  • Identity slips to voters must be plain (white) paper — no symbol, candidate/party name.
  • EC appoints observers for candidates to report election conduct issues.
• Party in Power (1979 Restrictions)
  • Ministers cannot combine official visits with election work or use official machinery for campaigning.

Issues with MCC

• Enforcement Challenges
  • Enforcement inconsistent/inadequate; violations may go unpunished due to lack of statutory backing.
  • ECI opposes legalization, citing need for swift election completion (~45 days); legal enforcement impractical due to lengthy judicial processes.
• Other Issues
  • Ambiguity: Vague provisions cause confusion among parties and candidates.
  • Limited Scope: Does not cover electoral funding, social media, hate speech.
  • Timing Issues: Effective only during elections; misconduct possible outside election periods.
  • Impact on Governance: Restrictions on government announcements may hinder governance.
  • Need for Reform: Calls for addressing shortcomings for fair, transparent elections.

Way Forward

• Strengthen Enforcement: Enhance mechanisms ensuring compliance by all parties. 
• Clarify Provisions: Improve clarity and specificity; need for codified, comprehensive MCC. 
• Expand Scope: Broaden coverage for digital campaigning, electoral funding transparency. 
• Legalize MCC: Evaluate proposals for statutory backing to enhance effectiveness and enforceability.
  • 2013: Standing Committee suggested legally binding MCC, integrating into RPA 1951.
• Dinesh Goswami Committee (1990)
  • Suggested statutory backing to overcome MCC weakness. 
  • Public Awareness: Launch campaigns educating voters, parties, candidates on MCC compliance and its role in fair elections. 
  • Continuous Review: Framework for regular evaluation addressing evolving electoral dynamics.

Conclusion

• MCC serves as democracy’s compass but faces declining commitment, increasing violations. Legalizing the MCC could empower EC to address corruption, ensure fair elections. It is essential for upholding integrity and credibility of democratic processes.