Indian democracy faces a fundamental test: can an ordinary, honest citizen compete in an election on equal terms with candidates backed by enormous wealth, muscle power and political patronage? When caste and religious polarisation, electoral inducements and party high commands shape political choices, the voter’s freedom risks becoming a formality. Disputes over electoral rolls and concerns about the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) impartiality have intensified this debate. Electoral reform is no longer optional; it is essential to restore public trust and ensure that political power derives from popular consent, not financial muscle.

First, secure the Election Commission’s independence. Article 324 of the Constitution entrusts the ECI with the superintendence, direction and control of elections. Yet, institutional autonomy depends on transparent appointments, adequate resources and accountability. Under the 2023 law, the selection committee comprises the Prime Minister, a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by him and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha. The ruling establishment’s numerical advantage raises concerns about impartiality. A balanced committee involving the Prime Minister, the Opposition Leader and the Chief Justice of India, or another independent constitutional authority, should be considered. Selection criteria and reasons for appointments must be public, while the Commission needs a secure tenure, independent budget and adequate staff.

Electoral-roll management must also be transparent. No genuine voter should lose the right to vote through arbitrary deletion. Authorities must provide prior notice, clear reasons and an accessible appeals process. Independent audits of roll revisions and timely publication of corrections should become mandatory.

Second, end the criminalisation of politics. The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) reported that 251 of the 543 MPs elected in 2024—46%—declared criminal cases against themselves. Of these, 170 faced serious criminal charges. These figures indicate declared cases, not convictions, and the distinction must be respected. Nevertheless, prolonged trials allow serious allegations to shadow public life for years. Special courts should expedite cases involving candidates and elected representatives. Safeguards against politically motivated prosecutions are essential; mere registration of a case should not automatically disqualify anyone. Convictions should attract disqualification as prescribed by law. False affidavits must invite stringent penalties, while candidates’ criminal cases, assets, liabilities, tax disclosures and educational qualifications should be accessible through a single official portal. Proven serious tax evasion and financial crimes should attract proportionate legal consequences.

Third, curb money power through enforceable financial transparency. In the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, the expenditure ceiling for an individual candidate was Rs.95 lakh in larger States. The Assembly candidate limit in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana was Rs.40 lakh. Such ceilings lose meaning when party expenditure, third-party campaigning, digital advertisements and indirect spending escape effective scrutiny.

Every party and candidate should maintain dedicated election accounts, disclose donations and their sources, and submit to independent audits. The Supreme Court’s 2024 judgment striking down the electoral bonds scheme underscored the importance of transparency in political funding. A comprehensive disclosure framework must prevent anonymous or concealed financing. Limited public funding, small-donor incentives, free broadcast time and equitable campaign access deserve consideration, subject to strict eligibility rules and independent audits. Those financing or distributing cash, liquor and gifts to influence voters must face prompt action. Expenditure monitoring should compare declared amounts with actual market costs.

Fourth, implement reforms in stages, from panchayats to Parliament. Within the first year, Parliament should prioritise transparent appointments, political-funding disclosures, independent audits and time-bound electoral-roll appeals. In the next phase, fast-track courts should address pending criminal cases involving candidates, while the ECI and State Election Commissions develop common disclosure and monitoring standards. Subsequently, independent evaluations should assess compliance, expenditure patterns and voter complaints, with findings published annually.

These measures must extend to gram panchayats, mandal and district parishads, municipalities, corporations, State Assemblies and Parliament. State Election Commissions require adequate funding, personnel and technology. Local candidates must disclose assets and criminal cases, while complaints about intimidation and inducements need swift resolution.

Fifth, democratise political parties and strengthen accountability after elections. Candidate selection must reflect integrity, public service and local credibility rather than wealth or unquestioning loyalty to party leadership. Transparent selection procedures should expand opportunities for women, young people, disadvantaged communities and financially weaker candidates. Women’s reservation must be implemented in accordance with constitutional provisions. The ECI should apply the Model Code of Conduct impartially and publish reasoned decisions on violations. Electoral rolls, vote counting and electronic voting machine verification must allow appropriate independent scrutiny. Elected representatives should publish annual reports on legislative attendance, participation in debates, questions raised, constituency development expenditure and progress on public commitments. Governments must disclose the financial implications of major electoral promises.

The choice before India is stark: elections can remain expensive contests dominated by money and influence, or become genuine instruments of popular sovereignty. Reform must be measurable, time-bound and enforceable, not another promise made during an election campaign. Democracy is credible only when votes cannot be bought, institutions cannot be politically captured, and an honest ordinary citizen has a fair chance of winning. Restoring that possibility is the real test of electoral reform—and the responsibility of every democratic institution.