Chief Election Commissioner – Appointment, Powers and Removal Process

Chief Election Commission

Chief Election Commission Latest News

  • Notices seeking the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar were rejected due to a lack of evidence. 

Office of the Chief Election Commissioner

  • The Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) is the head of the Election Commission of India, a constitutional body established under Article 324 of the Constitution.
  • The Commission is responsible for conducting free and fair elections to Parliament, State Legislatures, and the offices of the President and Vice-President.

Appointment of CEC

  • The CEC is appointed by the President of India.
  • As per the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, the appointment is made on the recommendation of a selection committee comprising: 
    • Prime Minister, 
    • Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and 
    • One Union Cabinet Minister.
  • This aims to bring transparency and balance in the selection process.

Tenure

  • The CEC holds office for a term of six years or until the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier.
  • The conditions of service cannot be varied to their disadvantage after appointment, ensuring independence.

Powers and Functions

  • The Election Commission, headed by the CEC, enjoys wide-ranging powers under Article 324.
  • These include:
    • Superintendence, direction, and control of elections. 
    • Preparation and revision of electoral rolls. 
    • Conduct of free and fair elections. 
    • Monitoring election expenditure and enforcing the Model Code of Conduct. 
  • The Commission also has plenary powers to act in areas where laws are silent, ensuring the integrity of the electoral process.

Removal Process

  • The removal of the CEC is similar to that of a Supreme Court judge.
  • Under Article 324(5), the CEC can be removed only on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The process requires:
    • A motion passed in both Houses of Parliament. 
    • Special majority (majority of total membership and two-thirds of members present and voting). 
  • This high threshold ensures institutional independence and protects the office from arbitrary removal.

News Summary

  • Rajya Sabha Chairman C.P. Radhakrishnan and Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla rejected notices submitted by Opposition MPs seeking the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. 
  • The presiding officers held that the Opposition failed to provide sufficient proof and that the allegations did not establish a prima facie case of “misbehaviour,” which is a constitutional requirement for removal. 
  • The notices were signed by 63 Rajya Sabha members and 130 Lok Sabha members and included seven charges against the CEC. These charges were examined in detail and subsequently rejected. 
  • The presiding officers stated that the allegations either lacked evidence, related to matters already adjudicated, or were currently under judicial consideration. 
  • They emphasised that such issues did not meet the “high constitutional bar” required to initiate removal proceedings under Articles 324(5) and 124(4)

Allegations Made Against the CEC

  • Several specific allegations were addressed. Claims regarding the CEC’s appointment being “tainted” were dismissed, as the pendency of a legal challenge does not constitute misbehaviour. 
  • Similarly, allegations of bias or differential treatment between the government and the opposition lacked demonstrable evidence. 
  • The refusal to share electoral data or provide machine-readable electoral rolls was found to be consistent with legal provisions and Supreme Court directions, including considerations of privacy under the Puttaswamy judgment
  • Issues related to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls were also examined. 

Basis of Rejection of the Allegations

  • The presiding officers reiterated that the Election Commission has plenary powers under Article 324 and that the Supreme Court has affirmed its competence in such matters. 
  • Allegations of contempt of court and lack of institutional independence were rejected as either falling under judicial jurisdiction or being vague and unsupported by evidence. 
  • Overall, the decision reinforced the constitutional safeguards surrounding the office of the CEC and highlighted the stringent standards required for initiating removal proceedings.

Source: TH

Chief Election Commissioner FAQs

Q1: Who appoints the Chief Election Commissioner?

Ans: The President of India appoints the CEC on the recommendation of a selection committee.

Q2: What is the tenure of the CEC?

Ans: Six years or until the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier.

Q3: Under which Article is the Election Commission established?

Ans: Article 324 of the Constitution.

Q4: How can the CEC be removed?

Ans: Through a parliamentary process similar to the removal of a Supreme Court judge.

Q5: Why was the recent removal plea rejected?

Ans: Due to lack of evidence and failure to meet the constitutional standard of “misbehaviour.”

India NDC Update: Key Targets and Challenges in India NDC

NDC

NDC Latest News

  • India’s revised Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement reflect a careful and measured approach to climate action.
  • The government has chosen continuity and gradual progress, rather than major changes to earlier commitments.
  • Despite challenges in energy and development, India is confident its targets are sufficient and aligned with its fair share of global climate responsibility.
  • The approach is consistent with climate justice principles and India’s status as a developing country.

India’s Updated NDCs: Three Key Climate Goals

  • Emissions intensity reduction: From 45% (by 2030) to 47% below 2005 levels by 2035.
  • Clean energy capacity: 60% of installed power capacity from non-fossil fuels.
  • Carbon sink expansion: Increase forest and tree cover to absorb 3.5–4 billion tonnes of CO₂ equivalent above 2005 levels.

India’s Climate Policy: Structural Constraints and Evolving Priorities

  • India’s climate policy is shaped by its structural constraints as a lower middle-income country, which limit its choices.
  • These constraints have remained largely unchanged, reinforcing India’s emphasis on the UNFCCC framework.
  • At the same time, the Paris Agreement’s requirement of periodic updates has increased the role of short-term considerations.
  • A worsening global climate environment has further influenced the formulation of recent commitments.

India’s Climate Action: Enthusiasm Amid Constraints

  • India continues to show strong commitment to climate action despite structural constraints. 
  • Both central and state governments are actively promoting initiatives such as electric vehicles, energy efficiency, expansion of non-fossil fuel energy, green hydrogen, and carbon capture and storage, with significant public and private investment.
  • However, given its current developmental stage, India considers it premature to convert all these efforts into stricter NDC commitments, which involve higher accountability and regular reporting through Biennial Transparency Reports to the UNFCCC.

Debate Over Adequacy of Targets

  • India’s updated NDCs have sparked debate. 
  • Some critics argue they are insufficient for achieving the 1.5°C global temperature goal, while others downplay them as easily achievable or suggest alternative metrics like renewable energy generation instead of installed capacity.
  • Even among supporters, there is uncertainty about whether the current commitments represent India’s maximum possible effort at this stage.

The Cost of Going Green: Challenges in India’s Climate Transition

  • India’s reliance on coal means that reducing emissions is not a natural outcome of growth but requires deliberate policy choices. 
  • Expanding renewable energy involves costs such as reducing coal-based generation, even when it is cheaper or readily available, thereby increasing the overall cost of climate commitments.

High Costs of Renewable Energy and Storage

  • While renewable energy and battery storage projects are expanding, scaling up storage capacity to meet future needs will require investments of several trillion rupees. 
  • Much of this burden may fall on the government, diverting resources from other sectors. 
  • Options like pumped hydropower are limited due to environmental, regulatory, and water-use constraints.

Infrastructure and Grid Challenges

  • Renewable energy expansion faces significant challenges, including inadequate transmission capacity and grid balancing issues. 
  • These hidden costs are often not accounted for when assessing the affordability of renewable energy.

Operational Inefficiencies and Curtailment

  • Since coal remains essential for backup when solar and wind are unavailable, renewable energy use often has to be curtailed. 
  • This cyclical operation increases maintenance and operational costs for thermal power plants, adding to the overall cost burden.

Broader Economic Costs of Transition

  • India is also investing in energy efficiency, industrial emissions targets, and rapid adoption of electric vehicles, alongside stricter emission norms. 
  • These measures represent significant economic costs that are often underestimated.

Lack of Climate Finance and Cost Assessment

  • Despite substantial domestic investment in climate mitigation since COP26, there is limited international climate finance support. 
  • Moreover, the total cost of India’s mitigation efforts so far has not been reliably estimated, creating a major knowledge gap.

Accounting for India’s Developmental Future in Climate Commitments

  • Limits of Current Economic Extrapolation - India’s mitigation strategy cannot rely on simply extending current economic trends. Its future requires space for industrial growth, expanded services, and rapid urbanisation, which are still at early stages.
  • Development vs Climate Expectations - Arguments that “India can do more” overlook the need to protect long-term development goals. Climate commitments must not constrain India’s ability to meet rising economic and social demands.
  • Constraints of Global Climate Goals - India cannot align its NDCs strictly with the 1.5°C target, as it is increasingly unattainable and beyond India’s capacity to influence, given its low per capita emissions.
  • Inequitable Distribution of Climate Efforts - Under the Paris framework, benefits of India’s emissions reductions largely accrue to major global emitters, especially when leading historical polluters reduce commitments or withdraw from climate action.
  • Need for Strategic and Context-Based Commitments - India’s climate policy must remain strategic and cautious, with NDCs shaped by its national circumstances, balancing development needs with global climate responsibilities.

Source: TH

NDC FAQs

Q1: What is India NDC?

Ans: India NDC refers to India’s climate commitments under the Paris Agreement, including emission reduction, renewable energy expansion, and increasing carbon sinks for climate mitigation.

Q2: What are the key targets in India NDC?

Ans: India NDC includes reducing emissions intensity, increasing non-fossil fuel power capacity, and expanding forest carbon sinks to strengthen climate action efforts.

Q3: Why is India NDC considered cautious?

Ans: India NDC is cautious because it balances climate goals with development needs, ensuring economic growth and energy security while gradually enhancing climate commitments.

Q4: What challenges affect India NDC implementation?

Ans: India NDC faces challenges like dependence on coal, high renewable energy costs, storage limitations, infrastructure gaps, and limited international climate finance support.

Q5: Why is India NDC debated globally?

Ans: India NDC is debated due to concerns about adequacy for the 1.5°C target, though India argues its commitments align with fairness and its lower per capita emissions.

Artemis II Mission: How Artemis II Set New Spaceflight Record

Artemis II

Artemis II Latest News

  • The Artemis II mission astronauts travelled about 406,771 km from Earth, setting a new record for the farthest human spaceflight.
  • The Orion spacecraft reached this distance while looping around the far side of the Moon.
    • The previous record was set by Apollo 13 (1970), which went farther due to an emergency deviation.
  • In contrast, Artemis II’s distance was planned, but it is not the main objective—rather a result of its mission trajectory.

Artemis II Flight Path: Free-Return Trajectory

  • Artemis II is a crewed lunar flyby mission, not a landing mission. Unlike earlier missions like Apollo 8, which used a circular lunar orbit, Orion follows an elliptical free-return trajectory.
  • This path uses the Moon’s gravity to slingshot the spacecraft back to Earth, reducing the need for engine burns.
  • The mission is designed to test the Orion spacecraft’s capabilities under controlled conditions.

How the Free-Return Trajectory Works in Artemis II

  • High Earth Orbit (HEO) Phase
    • The mission begins with Orion entering an elliptical orbit around Earth, extending to about 74,000 km. 
    • This phase provides a 42-hour window for astronauts to test critical systems like environmental control and life support. 
    • If any issue arises, the spacecraft remains within Earth’s gravity, allowing a quick abort and safe splashdown.
  • Translunar Slingshot Phase
    • After system clearance, Orion is propelled toward the Moon, targeting a point about 10,300 km beyond the lunar far side. 
    • The Moon’s gravity then captures and slingshots the spacecraft around it, directing it back toward Earth without requiring additional propulsion.
    •  
  •  

Why the Free-Return Trajectory is Advantageous

  • The flight path provides a built-in safety mechanism, ensuring the spacecraft can return to Earth even if engines fail, preventing astronauts from being stranded.
  • It is highly fuel-efficient, as it avoids the heavy deceleration and acceleration burns required for a circular lunar orbit.
  • By using the Moon’s gravity for direction change, the mission conserves propellant.
  • Lower fuel needs also reduce launch weight and allow reserve fuel for emergencies.

Next Steps in the Artemis Programme

  • The main goal of Artemis II is to test whether the Orion spacecraft and its systems can safely support human life in deep space conditions.
  • The 10-day mission evaluates its ability to match Artemis I distances while ensuring crew safety.
  • Orion’s return will provide critical data on performance and life-support systems for future missions.
  • These insights will help prepare upcoming missions aimed at returning humans to the Moon and building a Moon Base.

Source: IE | NASA

Artemis II FAQs

Q1: What is Artemis II mission?

Ans: Artemis II is NASA’s first crewed lunar flyby mission since 1972, designed to test Orion spacecraft systems and human survival in deep space conditions.

Q2: Why is Artemis II important?

Ans: Artemis II is important because it tests human spaceflight beyond Earth orbit, setting a new distance record and validating systems for future Moon missions.

Q3: What is the Artemis II flight path?

Ans: Artemis II follows a free-return trajectory, using the Moon’s gravity to loop around it and return to Earth without requiring major propulsion burns.

Q4: How does Artemis II ensure safety?

Ans: Artemis II ensures safety through a passive return path, allowing the spacecraft to return to Earth even if propulsion systems fail during the mission.

Q5: What comes after Artemis II?

Ans: After Artemis II, NASA will analyse mission data to improve systems for future lunar missions, aiming to land humans on the Moon and build a lunar base.

Enquire Now