Model Code of Conduct (MCC)
Kartavya Desk Staff
Syllabus: Polity
Source: TH
Context: The Model Code of Conduct (MCC) has resurfaced in debate after alleged violations during the Bihar elections, where welfare cash disbursals under a newly launched scheme coincided with polling dates — raising questions about fairness and electoral ethics.
About Model Code of Conduct (MCC):
• What it is? A set of guidelines issued by the Election Commission of India (ECI) to ensure free, fair, and ethical elections by regulating political conduct during polls.
• A set of guidelines issued by the Election Commission of India (ECI) to ensure free, fair, and ethical elections by regulating political conduct during polls.
• Objective: To maintain a level playing field among political parties and prevent misuse of official machinery for electoral advantage.
• History of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC)
• 1960 – Origin: First introduced during the Kerala Assembly elections as a voluntary code to regulate political conduct.
• 1962 – National Adoption: Circulated by the Election Commission of India to all recognized political parties and States during the Lok Sabha elections, gaining all-party consensus.
• 1979–1991 – Institutionalization: Gradually evolved through multiple elections and began strict enforcement post-1991 to curb corruption and misuse of power.
• 2013 – Legal Refinement: Revised comprehensively after the * Subramaniam Balaji vs. State of Tamil Nadu* case, with new guidelines on election manifestos to prevent misuse of freebies.
Key Features:
• General Conduct: Parties must avoid communal appeals or personal attacks; propaganda through religious places is banned.
• Party in Power Restrictions: Ministers cannot announce new projects, financial grants, or make ad-hoc appointments after election announcement.
• Campaign Discipline: Ban on bribing, intimidation, or distributing liquor within 48 hours before polling.
• Use of Government Machinery: Public media, transport, and rest houses cannot be used for partisan purposes.
• Election Manifestos: Parties must justify financial feasibility of promises and avoid freebies that distort voter choice.
• Meetings and Processions: Prior police permissions are mandatory to prevent clashes and maintain order.
Need for a Strong Model Code of Conduct (MCC):
• Ensure electoral integrity: A robust MCC safeguards the free and fair nature of elections by curbing misuse of administrative power, state funds, and media influence during campaigns.
• Prevent misuse of state machinery: Strengthening MCC deters ruling parties from announcing projects or cash transfers that unfairly sway voter sentiment near elections.
Eg: The Bihar Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana (2025) was criticised for influencing voters through pre-poll disbursals.
• Curb populist and freebie politics: A stringent MCC prevents unsustainable welfare promises that burden public exchequers for electoral gain.
• Promote ethical competition: It ensures a level playing field where candidates compete on ideas and performance, not state-funded advantages.
• Preserve voter confidence: By guaranteeing impartiality, a strong MCC reinforces citizens’ trust in democratic institutions and the credibility of electoral outcomes.
Challenges Associated with MCC:
• Non-binding framework: MCC is a voluntary code without legal enforceability, reducing the Election Commission’s ability to impose punitive measures.
• Circumvention through ongoing schemes: Governments often relabel or accelerate schemes under the guise of continuity, violating MCC in spirit but not in law.
Eg: Telangana’s rebranded subsidy program (2023) continued disbursals despite the model code’s restrictions.
• Slow judicial redressal: Legal cases on MCC violations move sluggishly, outliving the election cycle, rendering enforcement toothless.
Eg: Complaints from the 2019 Lok Sabha polls were still under inquiry two years later.
• Digital and AI manipulation: The rise of AI-generated propaganda and deepfakes undermines traditional MCC oversight mechanisms.
• Political non-cooperation: Ruling parties resist stricter MCC norms citing executive independence and governance continuity, weakening EC’s institutional authority.
Way Ahead:
• Give MCC statutory backing: Enact a Model Code of Conduct Act linking MCC with the Representation of the People Act, 1951 to make violations legally punishable. Eg: A similar legal codification exists in the UK’s Electoral Administration Act (2006) ensuring accountability.
• Create fast-track MCC tribunals: Establish dedicated election benches to dispose of complaints within the poll period, ensuring real-time justice.
• Leverage digital surveillance: Deploy AI-based tools and social media analytics to track online propaganda, hate speech, and deepfake dissemination.
Eg: The ECI’s “cVIGIL” app and proposed “AI-Monitor” platform can detect MCC violations instantly.
• Enhance transparency and accountability: Mandate public disclosure of all MCC violation reports and EC actions within a fixed 48-hour window.
• Institutionalize ethical leadership: Introduce mandatory ethics and electoral integrity training for political functionaries to foster democratic responsibility.
Conclusion:
A strengthened MCC is essential to protect the sanctity of India’s democratic process from populist distortions and power misuse. Legal authority, technological innovation, and ethical political culture together can transform the MCC from a moral guideline into a true guarantor of electoral fairness and integrity.