Andhra’s Democracy Now Requires a Supreme Court Escort

Andhra Pradesh has discovered a thrilling new democratic innovation: candidates may file nominations, provided the Supreme Court first reminds the state that they should be allowed to do so. The State Election Commission halted the process in 100 urban local bodies — 13 municipal corporations and 87 municipalities and nagar panchayats — after the court directed police protection, adequate deployment and CCTV coverage at nomination centres. Democracy, apparently, now arrives with a security detail and a compliance report.

Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu’s ruling alliance is advertising more than 22,800 nominations as proof that everything is proceeding normally. TDP candidates account for 8,774; YSRCP candidates, 8,128. Fine. But the same election process was shifted from October 28 to November 1, nominations were reopened for 48 hours in Kadapa, Rajampet, Tirupati and Mydukur, and the court had to intervene so candidates could reach the counter without the counter becoming a political obstacle course. This is democracy presented in two brochures: one for the press conference, one for the nomination centre.

YSRCP leader Sajjala Ramakrishna Reddy cited 76 incidents of violence across 11 districts. Those are allegations, not findings. Police figures cited by The Indian Express recorded 45 incidents over two days, including 14 on October 23. Naidu responded with “criminal politics”, accusations of unrest and claims involving hired groups, a Jana Sena office and alleged weapons and liquor in an MP’s car. Those too remain allegations. The parties have built a perfect little machine in which every accusation is urgent, every denial is patriotic and every missing fact is sent for a television debate.

Bonda Umamaheswara Rao says the Opposition is delaying elections and jeopardising nearly ₹12,500 crore in local-body funds. Perhaps. But if the government’s answer to a contested nomination process is that the Opposition is criminal, while the court’s answer is to order protection and CCTV, the administrative achievement is not exactly subtle. A government in command does not need the judiciary to supervise the furniture before polling begins.

Naidu wants credit for the nominations and excuses for the intimidation; Jagan Mohan Reddy wants to defend democracy from the political system he helped perfect. The public gets neither democracy nor modesty. It gets a November 1 election under judicial observation — which is less a triumph than a performance review.