The nation’s Parliament is heading to be a reality for the 17th time in a span of seven decades. Its 543 members-to-be have presented themselves before the electorate mass of about 900 million eligible voters. Two nominated members, to represent the Anglo-Indian section of the country’s population, are to make up the total membership of the august House as 545 for the next five years from June this year. The message conveying the factor of sacredness of exercising the right to vote for electing their representatives by the eligible voters to the different law-making bodies of the democracy has been bestowed publicity on a scale witnessed at no time before.

The Election Commission of India, commonly mistaken as one of the arms of the government, is an autonomous Constitutional authority responsible for administering election processes in the nation to its Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, State Legislative Assemblies and Legislative Councils, Offices of the President and Vice-President. The Commission functions under the authority of Constitution with powers to act in an appropriate manner to deal with a given situation in the conduct of elections. The model code of conduct symbolises not only the do’s and don’ts that those aspiring to represent people are required to comply with but also the appropriateness of the Commission’s measures to deal with the situation created by those crossing the Lakshman Rekha as it were, thus sullying the sacredness of voting.

In a throwback to the era of election during the first few decades following the first such event in 1951-52, the pre-poll scenario, as the seniors among the elderly will testify, the wanna be representatives of people didn’t have to aspire but virtually emerged as the voice of the people at large. The element of sacredness was never in doubt then.

The outlook of serving the country to ensure wellness of its every citizen which earned the respect for the elected representatives then has turned into a goal of self-service now. The vote-seekers find it irksome to answer the question: Why we should vote for them? Their rhetoric is overflowing with hate and mutual accusations unwittingly portraying themselves as a mass unworthy of the votes, barring hardly any exception. The democracy, showing cracks in its structure, even as it is yawning year-on-year, has come so far, but the answer to the question: “Is it because of the people’s representatives in the various law-making bodies or despite their countless misdeeds?” is as clear as daylight.

The functionaries of the government’s law-keeping wings seem to be priding themselves about their pursuit of the offending lot luring the gullible voters with cash, liquor and other temptations, as being reported in cold print by the dailies. It is common knowledge that what they have confiscated is the proverbial tip of the iceberg, even as the vote-seekers have no qualms about sullying the sacredness of votes.