Model Code of Conduct Enforcement in India: Patterns & Delays | TruthWave Block 11

MODEL CODE OF CONDUCT: PATTERNS, DELAYS & SELECTIVE ACTION ACROSS 20 YEARS

TruthWave Level-5 Investigation | Block 11 of 25


SUMMARY

The Model Code of Conduct (MCC) is supposed to keep elections fair and neutral. But over the past two decades, researchers, political parties, retired officers, and even the Supreme Court have flagged a consistent pattern: MCC enforcement is delayed, selective, ambiguous, and often ineffective—regardless of which political party is in power. Block 11 documents these patterns using verified evidence.


INTRODUCTION — A POWERFUL RULEBOOK WITHOUT LEGAL POWER

The Model Code of Conduct controls:

  • Campaign speeches
  • Use of government machinery
  • Advertising and publicity
  • Transfers of officials
  • Use of religion and caste
  • Hate speech
  • Conduct of ministers

But here is the structural flaw:

The MCC is not a law.
It is merely a set of guidelines.

This makes the Election Commission dependent on the willingness of:

  • Candidates
  • Parties
  • Ministers
  • State officials

to obey the rules voluntarily.

When political pressure rises, the MCC becomes a paper shield.

TruthWave now exposes the patterns the public must understand.


MCC FAILURE PATTERN 1 — SLOW ACTION ACROSS MULTIPLE GOVERNMENTS

MCC complaints often take:

  • Hours
  • Days
  • Sometimes even weeks

to process.

This delay has been criticized in:

  • 2004 general elections
  • 2009 general elections
  • 2014 general elections
  • 2019 general elections
  • 2024 general elections
  • Several state elections

Example:
A complaint filed in the morning receives action at night—
long after the damage is done.

TruthWave Commentary:
A slow referee changes the outcome of the match
even if the rules are perfect.


MCC FAILURE PATTERN 2 — SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT ACROSS POLITICAL ERAS

This is the most sensitive pattern.
But TruthWave presents it neutrally, with evidence across all eras.

UPA Era (2004–2014)

Opposition parties (BJP, regional parties) repeatedly alleged:

  • MCC action was slow against ruling ministers
  • Public schemes were announced during poll season
  • Violations received warnings instead of punishment

Examples reported:
Speeches by ministers during MCC leading to warnings, not strict action.

Researchers documented the pattern.

NDA Era (2014–2024)

Opposition parties (Congress, regional parties) alleged:

  • Delayed notices for top leaders
  • Quick action against opposition candidates
  • Publicity campaigns during MCC through government channels
  • Inaction on hate speech complaints

Multiple petitions reached the Supreme Court.

Regional Government Elections (Bengal, UP, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu)

Across states, MCC enforcement varied widely:

  • In some states, ECI transferred officers aggressively
  • In some states, it acted late on complaints
  • In a few cases, district officials seemed aligned with ruling parties

TruthWave Commentary:
Political colours change.
The pattern does not.

The MCC’s weakness is structural, not partisan.


MCC FAILURE PATTERN 3 — INADEQUATE ACTION AGAINST HATE SPEECH

Hate speech is one of the most serious MCC violations.

Supreme Court openly questioned the ECI:

“Why are you not acting immediately?”
“Why is there silence when violations are obvious?”

Source (public domain):
LiveLaw, Indian Express, Supreme Court hearing reports.

In 2019 and again in 2024, the Court expressed clear displeasure.

TruthWave Commentary:
When the Court scolds the referee,
the game itself becomes questionable.


MCC FAILURE PATTERN 4 — WARNINGS INSTEAD OF PENALTIES

Most MCC actions end in:

  • Advisories
  • Warnings
  • Appeals to “maintain decorum”

Very rarely:

  • Campaign bans
  • FIRs
  • Strict punitive action

This weakens deterrence.

Example from both UPA and NDA eras:
Repeated violations resulted in written warnings only.

TruthWave Commentary:
If breaking rules carries no real consequence,
professional politicians will break them strategically.


MCC FAILURE PATTERN 5 — GOVERNMENT PUBLICITY DURING MCC

Civil society groups (Common Cause, ADR) repeatedly documented:

  • Government advertising before polls
  • Public programs launched days before MCC
  • Social media campaigns continuing despite guidelines
  • Self-promotion using taxpayer funds

ECI intervened in some cases,
but often long after the benefit had been gained.

TruthWave Commentary:
Incumbency advantage becomes unequal
when publicity rules are not enforced aggressively.


MCC FAILURE PATTERN 6 — ECI’S INCONSISTENT COMMUNICATION

A major complaint from:

  • Journalists
  • Observers
  • Civil society
  • Public

is that ECI does not:

  • publish detailed MCC orders promptly
  • explain delays
  • give case-by-case reasoning
  • provide transparent updates

This secrecy breeds distrust.

TruthWave Commentary:
Democracy does not trust silence.
Democracy trusts explanations.


MCC FAILURE PATTERN 7 — LACK OF LEGAL BACKING

The Supreme Court, former CECs, and research institutions have said:

  • MCC must become legally enforceable
  • Violations must carry statutory penalties
  • ECI needs clear legal authority to punish

Right now, ECI relies on:

  • persuasion
  • moral authority
  • public pressure

not law.

TruthWave Commentary:
A moral code is powerless
against a system built on political competition.


CIVIL SOCIETY ANALYSIS OF MCC FAILURES

ADR

Found uneven actions and delay patterns.
Reported selective enforcement statistically.

PUCL

Highlighted inaction on hate speech and communal language.

Common Cause

Exposed misuse of government media during the election period.

Lokniti-CSDS

Public trust surveys show falling confidence in ECI neutrality.

TruthWave Commentary:
When civil society, judiciary, media, and public all see patterns,
the institution must reform—
not defend its weaknesses.


HUMAN STORIES: HOW MCC FAILURES IMPACT REAL PEOPLE

Voter in Rajasthan:
“Leaders break MCC openly, nothing happens. How is this fair?”

Polling staff in MP:
“We report violations. Action, if any, comes too late.”

Young voter in Delhi:
“When the ECI doesn’t stop hate speech, it divides society.”

These stories show the human cost of weak enforcement.


WHY MCC REFORM IS CRITICAL

Because MCC failures trigger:

  • Misinformation
  • Polarisation
  • Unfair advantage
  • Declining trust
  • Legal battles
  • Public confusion
  • International doubt

India deserves a rulebook that protects every voter equally.


TRUTHWAVE REFORM SUGGESTIONS

  1. Make MCC legally binding
  2. Impose fines and criminal penalties for major violations
  3. Create a 24-hour fast-response MCC unit
  4. Publish every MCC order publicly, within hours
  5. Independent MCC review board with civil society participation
  6. Real-time dashboard of violations and actions
  7. Supreme Court–monitored MCC during national elections

This is how a 21st-century election should work.


CONTINUE TO BLOCK 12

Block 12 will cover Election Commission’s communication failures:

  • Delayed press releases
  • Lack of social media transparency
  • Non-publication of Form 17C
  • VVPAT audit secrecy
  • Data gaps
  • Confusing turnout statements
  • Public trust decline

Leave a Comment