The Election Commission’s order on the complaints of suppression of >election expenditure by former Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan may pose a threat to his immediate political future, and of possible disqualification from contesting elections for three years. However, he has escaped action for what could have been the more damaging charge of procuring favourable coverage through ‘paid news’ in the media to further his electoral prospects in the 2009 Assembly polls. Even though informally described as a ‘paid news’ case, the Commission is not proceeding against him for getting positive coverage through consideration in cash or kind. Rather, he is being hauled up for failing to account for spending involved in the publication of 25 press advertisements that seemed to boost his electoral prospects. Rejecting his contention that he had not authorised their publication, the Commission has ruled that there was “implied authorisation” in that he had participated in 19 of those advertised meetings addressed by star campaigners Sonia Gandhi, Jyotiraditya Scindia and Salman Khan. The poll panel has pointed to the dangers of accepting his plea that he could still account for the expenditure incurred on these advertisements, as he had not exhausted the full quantum of spending allowed to a candidate. For, it could lead to candidates suppressing expenditure initially, and offering to include them in accounts statements when found out.
In recent years, the Commission has been trying to curb the ‘paid news’ phenomenon, but there is >no legal provision at present for punishment to those involved. What can be done at best is to establish whether promotional poll campaign coverage was actually paid for by candidates, and then proceeding against them for failing to include the consideration involved in their expenditure statements. In Mr. Chavan’s case, the Commission has found that some newspapers published identical or similar articles and material supplied by political sources and passed them off as editorial content. However, it has declined to find him guilty, as the content was only general propaganda for the Congress and did not aim to boost his prospects as a candidate. Its view that ethical journalism demands that even newspapers that support the political philosophy of a party need to make a distinction between opinion and news columns is unexceptionable. It will certainly be a major setback for Mr. Chavan, who successfully staged an electoral comeback in the Lok Sabha polls after being made to resign as Chief Minister over the >Adarsh Housing Society scandal , to find himself in the political wilderness again if he is disqualified, but it is some relief to him that the ‘paid news’ charge did not stick.
