Congress Labels ECI Notice to Kharge “Casual” and “Motivated”

NEW DELHI — The Congress party has issued a sharp “summary response” to the Election Commission of India (ECI), defending party chief Mallikarjun Kharge against a show-cause notice regarding his recent “terrorist” remark. The opposition party has slammed the move as a violation of natural justice, claiming the notice “smacks of ulterior motives.”

Congress General Secretary Jairam Ramesh has requested a one-week extension to file a detailed legal response, citing the Congress President’s hectic national campaign schedule.

The “Terrorist” Remark Controversy

The ECI’s notice follows a speech by Kharge in Chennai where he initially used the word “terrorist” while criticizing the AIADMK-BJP alliance. Kharge immediately clarified his stance in the same briefing:

• The Clarification: Kharge stated he meant the PM is “terrorising” the democratic fabric and political parties through the misuse of central agencies like the ED, IT, and CBI.

• Congress Defense: Ramesh argued that the ECI relied on a “quote taken out of context” by complainants and failed to acknowledge the instant clarification already in the public domain.

Allegations of ECI Administrative “Lapses”

In a letter to the Chief Election Commissioner, Jairam Ramesh highlighted several procedural inconsistencies:

• Conflicting Notices: The party reportedly received two different notices under the same number, signed by different officials.

• Complainant Discrepancy: One notice named TMC’s Derek O’Brien as the complainant, while another version uploaded to the ECI website mysteriously dropped the name.

• Short Deadline: The Congress criticized the ECI for giving a mere 24-hour window to respond during a peak election phase.

The Counter-Attack

While responding to the notice, the Congress also demanded ECI action on two other fronts:

1. PM Modi’s Speech: Alleged violation of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) for attacking the Congress by name and accusing it of “foeticide” during an address to the nation.

2. Amit Shah’s Campaign Promises: Alleged that promises of direct cash transfers to women and youth (e.g., ₹3,000/month) constitute a “quid pro quo” and bribery under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

The Congress has requested a hearing with a senior delegation to present their full legal rebuttal once the requested one-week extension is granted.