Parliamentary Panel Recommends Lowering Minimum Age For Contesting Assembly Elections To 18 Years

The minimum age for contesting an Assembly election should be lowered from 25 years to 18 years, according to a recommendation made by a Parliamentary panel on Friday.

The panel believes that this change would bring a wider range of viewpoints to policy debates and ultimately enhance the credibility of the political process.

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice recently presented its report on election process aspects and potential reforms to the Rajya Sabha.

The committee, chaired by BJP MP Sushil Kumar Modi, expressed concerns about the government and Election Commission's proposal for a common electoral roll for various elections. They stressed the importance of adhering to the principles of federalism.

Additionally, the committee proposed increasing the punishment for candidates who file false affidavits, suggesting a penalty of up to two years imprisonment and a fine depending on the severity of the offense.

The committee's report highlighted the benefits of reducing the minimum age requirement for candidacy in elections. They argued that this change would provide young individuals with equal opportunities to engage in democracy, supported by evidence from global practices, the increasing political awareness among young people, and the advantages of youth representation.

In the past, political parties have often favored experienced candidates for public office while dismissing younger candidates as lacking experience. This bias towards age and experience was noted in the report, which emphasized the need for a more inclusive approach that recognizes the potential and capabilities of younger candidates.

The belief that political competence comes with age, which Plato argued for centuries ago, is now considered outdated in the 21st century. The committee asserts that due to increased education, globalization, and digitalization, younger individuals are fully capable of running for office in all countries.

The committee finds it disconcerting that 47% of MPs in 2019 were over the age of 55, despite India's median age being 27.9 years, according to PRS Legislative Research.

However, the Election Commission disagrees with the need to change the minimum age. In its input to the committee, the poll panel argues that expecting 18-year-olds to possess the necessary experience and maturity for political responsibilities is unrealistic.

The committee also highlights the significant political awareness and knowledge of youth globally. It points to youth-led movements like Fridays for Future and March for Our Lives as evidence of their capacity to rally and champion critical social and political concerns.

The committee has addressed the issue of a common electoral roll, which was initially proposed by the Election Commission to the government in 1999. According to the committee, the Constitution assigns the task of creating the electoral roll for Parliamentary and Assembly elections to the EC, while the responsibility for local body polls lies with the respective state election commissions.

The committee has advised the government to proceed cautiously and uphold the principles of federalism enshrined in the Constitution. It emphasizes the importance of carefully assessing the potential consequences before taking any actions.

The committee suggests that the Election Commission should avoid overstepping its boundaries into the State's domain and instead propose a solution that benefits all parties involved.

The report highlights that 30 states and Union Territories utilize the ECI's electoral rolls as a draft before finalizing their rolls for local body elections through public claims and objections. However, some states like Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Kerala do not utilize the EC data.

The Election Commission believes that implementing a common electoral roll would enhance efficiency and reduce expenses.

The Election Commission has vehemently expressed disagreement with the need to change the minimum age. In its input to the Parliamentary committee, the poll panel states that it has considered the issue and deems it unrealistic to expect 18-year-olds to possess the necessary experience and maturity for the responsibilities involved.

Some committee members expressed skepticism regarding the linking of Aadhaar and Voter IDs for non-citizens.

The EC had previously started collecting Aadhaar details on a voluntary basis. To address this concern, the committee recommended that the EC establish a legal provision or alternative to ensure that non-citizens with Aadhaar are not included on the electoral rolls.

The report emphasized the importance of assuring citizens who have not yet linked their Aadhaar that they can still exercise their legal right to vote.

The committee sought input from national political parties on various issues, including the EC's proposal for remote voting for internal migrants.

However, only responses from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M) were received.

The AAP expressed support for a common electoral roll but suggested that state election commissions should not be obligated to adopt the EC's roll. They also raised concerns about the lack of study on the migrant population and the drawbacks of the remote voting proposal. The party recommended reducing the minimum age for candidates.

On the other hand, the CPI(M) expressed reservations about the common electoral roll proposal, viewing it as a step towards centralization of the election process and potentially dangerous. In their submission to the committee, they supported lowering the minimum age for candidates and urged the committee to recommend the scrapping of electoral bonds.