Model Code of Conduct | 20 Mar 2026

Source: DD 

Why in News?

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has enforced the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) following the announcement of the 2026 General Elections to the Legislative Assemblies of Assam, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and the Union Territory of Puducherry, alongside bye-elections in multiple states.  

• With this announcement, the MCC has come into immediate effect to ensure a level playing field and prevent the misuse of official machinery by the party in power.

What is the Model Code of Conduct? 

• About: The Model Code of Conduct is a comprehensive set of guidelines issued by the ECI to regulate the behavior of political parties, candidates, and the government during the election period. 
• Objective: To maintain the purity of the electoral process, ensure peace and order during campaigning, and prevent the ruling party from gaining an unfair advantage through state resources. 
• Statutory Backing and Enforceability: 
  • No Direct Statutory Backing: The MCC itself is not a legally enforceable statute. It is a moral code built on political consensus. 
  • Constitutional Authority: The ECI enforces the MCC under Article 324 of the Constitution, which mandates the superintendence, direction, and control of elections. 
  • Indirect Legal Enforcement: While the MCC is not a law, many of its provisions are enforceable through corresponding sections in existing statutes. For example, bribery, intimidation, and impersonation are punishable under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 (now Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023), and the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951 (e.g., Section 123 deals with "corrupt practices"). 
• Duration: The MCC comes into operation the moment the ECI announces the election schedule and remains active until the election results are declared. 
• Evolution: The concept first originated during the 1960 Kerala Assembly elections as a voluntary consensus among political parties.  
  • It was first widely circulated during the 1962 simultaneous elections, where parties largely followed it. In 1979, the EC introduced a comprehensive MCC, later refined through consultations with political parties to curb money and muscle power. 
  • In 1991, the MCC was strictly enforced and institutionalized under the leadership of then-Chief Election Commissioner T.N. Seshan, transforming it into a powerful tool for electoral purity. 
• Key Provisions of the MCC: 
  • General Conduct: Prohibits activities that aggregate existing differences, cause tension among communities, or appeal to caste and communal feelings for securing votes.  
    • Places of worship cannot be used as forums for election propaganda. 
  • Meetings and Processions: Political parties must inform local police authorities in advance about the venue and time of meetings to ensure adequate security and traffic arrangements.  
    • Processions by rival parties must not clash or disrupt each other. 
  • Polling Day: Restricts the entry of unauthorized persons into polling booths. No campaigning is allowed within 100 meters of the polling station, and the serving of liquor or eatables near booths is strictly banned. 
  • Observers: ECI appoints General, Expenditure, and Police Observers to whom candidates can report breaches. 
  • Party in Power: Ministers are prohibited from combining official visits with electioneering. Government transport, machinery, and personnel cannot be used for campaign purposes.  
    • Furthermore, the ruling party cannot announce new financial grants, lay foundation stones, or make ad-hoc appointments that could influence voters. 
  • Election Manifestos: Added in 2013 following the Supreme Court judgment in the S. Subramaniam Balaji vs Govt. of Tamil Nadu case. It mandates that manifestos must not contain promises that vitiate the purity of elections and should reflect the rationale for promises and ways to meet the financial requirements. 
• Technological Initiatives by ECI: 
  • c-VIGIL App: Empowers citizens to report MCC violations (like illicit money or liquor distribution) in real-time, with a mandate for flying squads to resolve complaints within 100 minutes. 
  • SUVIDHA Module: A single-window system for political parties to apply for the use of public spaces, maidans, and helipads on a strict "first come, first serve" basis, preventing the ruling party from monopolizing resources. 
  • Voluntary Code of Ethics (2019): To address digital challenges, the ECI and social media platforms (like Meta, Google, X) agreed to a "Voluntary Code of Ethics" to process legal requests from the ECI within 3 hours during the 48-hour silence period. 

What are the Contemporary Challenges in Enforcing the MCC? 

• The "Freebies" Conundrum: Distinguishing between genuine welfare measures (Directive Principles of State Policy) and populist electoral "freebies" (Revdi culture) remains a gray area, often announced just before the MCC kicks in. 
• Lack of Statutory Backing: The MCC is a voluntary, consensus-based document, not a legally binding statute.  
  • The ECI relies heavily on moral persuasion, warnings, or temporary campaign bans. It lacks the explicit, direct authority to deregister political parties or permanently disqualify candidates solely for MCC violations. Critics often refer to MCC  as a "tiger without teeth." 
• Ineffective Post-Election Redressal: If an MCC violation is booked under the RPA or IPC, the judicial process takes years.  
  • By the time a verdict is reached, the election cycle is long over, defeating the deterrent value of the law. 
• Technological and Digital Disruptions: The rapid proliferation of Artificial Intelligence, deepfakes, and micro-targeted advertising makes it incredibly difficult for the ECI to monitor hate speech and misinformation in real-time. 
  • Political parties frequently bypass expenditure limits and MCC guidelines by using proxy meme pages, influencers, and unverified social media handles to run smear campaigns (Surrogate Advertising). 
  • The spread of communal or inflammatory propaganda via encrypted messaging platforms (like WhatsApp) largely escapes the ECI's surveillance, rendering the traditional "48-hour silence period" nearly obsolete in the digital realm. 
• Enforcement and Credibility Deficits: Clauses mandating that criticism should be confined to "policies and programs" or maintaining the "purity of the election" are highly subjective.  
  • This leaves room for varying interpretations and inconsistent enforcement. 
• Allegations of Bias and Delayed Action: The ECI frequently faces criticism from civil society and opposition parties for delayed or diluted responses to provocative speeches made by high-profile "star campaigners" and senior leaders, which can erode public trust in the institution's impartiality.

What Measures can Strengthen MCC?

• Power to Deregister Parties: Currently, the ECI can register a party but cannot deregister it.  
  • The RPA must be amended to empower the ECI to deregister or suspend parties for severe and repeated MCC violations. 
  • In 2013, the Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law, and Justice proposed legally binding the MCC and integrating it into the RPA 1951. 
  • Dinesh Goswami Committee on Electoral Reforms (1990) suggested that the weakness of the MCC could be overcome by giving it statutory backing and making it enforceable through law 
• Curbing "Paid News" and Surrogate Ads: As recommended by the 255th Law Commission Report (2015), "Paid News" and surrogate digital advertising should be explicitly classified as a "Corrupt Practice" under RPA, making it an electoral offense. 
• Expanding the "Silence Period": Based on the Umesh Sinha Committee (2019) recommendations, Section 126 of RPA (which bans campaigning 48 hours before polling) must be amended to explicitly include the internet, social media, and OTT platforms. 
• Fast-Track Election Tribunals: Establish special tribunals to dispose of election petitions and severe MCC violations within a strict 6-month timeframe, preventing the weaponization of judicial delays. 
• Complete Autonomy: The ECI must be granted an independent secretariat and its budget should be "charged" upon the Consolidated Fund of India (similar to the CAG and UPSC) to insulate it completely from executive pressure. 
• Statutory Rules for Big Tech: The 2019 "Voluntary Code of Ethics" for social media platforms is insufficient.  
  • It must be replaced with mandatory statutory obligations under the IT Rules, 2021, forcing platforms (Meta, Google, X) to take down MCC-violating content (hate speech, deepfakes) within 3 hours of an ECI directive. 
• Mandatory AI Watermarking: To combat deepfakes, the ECI should mandate that all political parties use cryptographic watermarks for digital campaign materials, ensuring traceability of fake news back to specific IT cells. 
  • Integrating the c-VIGIL app with real-time data analytics and AI to auto-flag communal speeches or illicit cash distributions before human complaints are even filed. 
• Capping Party Expenditure: While individual candidate expenditure is capped, party expenditure is limitless.  
  • A statutory cap on total party expenditure is urgently needed to prevent money power from destroying the level playing field. 

Conclusion 

The efficacy of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) lies not just in its rules, but in the certainty and swiftness of its enforcement. Its strict implementation, supported by administrative measures and digital monitoring tools, reflects the ECI’s commitment to ensuring free, fair, and credible elections. Strengthening it through legal and technological reforms can transform the MCC from a “tiger without teeth” into an effective safeguard of India’s democratic integrity.