Blitz Bureau
THE Supreme Court recently refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking direction for participation of Indian diaspora in the electoral process through postal ballot or embassy voting. Remarking that the court cannot compel Parliament to enact a particular law, a Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan suggested the litigant to approach an appropriate forum. “We cannot issue a direction to Parliament to enact the law,” remarked Justice Kant-led Bench.
The petitioner later sought permission to withdraw the PIL. Ultimately, the matter was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the appropriate forum.
The petition said that overseas Indians face obstacles in participating in the democratic process, including voting in elections and being adequately represented in Parliament, despite their deep ties and contributions to the homeland. It added that this large community, actively contributing to the country’s economic development, remains marginalised in the country’s democratic process, despite India being renowned as the “mother of democracy”.
The plea sought amendments to the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, to ensure the “constitutional democratic rights of representation for Indian citizens residing abroad”. It said that the denial of democratic rights, including voting and representation, to the Indian diaspora causes significant harm by excluding a substantial section of the population from participating in the democratic process. According to data of the Ministry of External Affairs, the Indian diaspora comprises approximately 32 million individuals, including 13.4 million NonResident Indians (NRIs) and 18.6 million Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs).
