This document proposes electoral reforms to reduce the influence of money and muscle power in politics. It suggests implementing self-regulation measures that require candidates to disclose their assets and criminal cases on all promotional materials. It also proposes an electoral funding system where corporate and government jointly create a fund distributed to candidates securing a minimum vote percentage. The reforms aim to curb the impact of money and assets on election outcomes and discourage criminal candidates, providing a more level playing field for all. Key challenges around monitoring compliance and distributing post-election funds are also discussed along with mitigation factors.

1. Introducing electoral reforms to
reduce the influence of money and
muscle power in politics

2. Problem Statement
Money and Muscle Power has almost become
the necessary condition for winning election
32.65%
18.47%
6.28%
0.43%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
> 5 cr 50 lakhs to 5
cr
50 lakhs to
10
< 10 lakhs
Value of Asset Vs. Chance of
winning
% of winners
128
430
58
296
912
164
522
76
274
1036
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
MPs
with
pending
criminal
records
Total
pending
criminal
cases
MPs
with
pending
serious
criminal
cases
Total
serious
IPC
sections
against
MPs
Total
Lok Sabha 2004
Lok Sabha 2009

3. Curbing the effect of Money and Muscle power
by bringing Self Regulation and Electoral
funding
Snapshot of solution proposed
• Self regulation : Make it mandatory to mention the total asset and number of
criminal cases in all the promotional material used by the candidate and
maintaining and sharing database of all the donors
• Provision for electoral funding through fund created jointly by Corporate and
Government and the fund distribution based on securing the minimum % vote
Imposing Self
Regulation & Provision
for Electoral Funding
• Election commission will enforce the self regulatory measures
• 10 % of the mandatory 2% of profit which should be spent for CSR by corporate
should go to the electoral fund which will have 50-50 contribution from
government and corporate
Implementation
Model
• The implementation of self regulation methods will not have any additional cost
and will discourage the parties for giving tickets to tainted candidates
• The electoral funding mechanism will give candidates a level playing field
Advantage over
existing system

4. Implementation of Self Regulation Measures
• 20% area of every promotional material should be used for declaring the
Asset and total number of criminal cases. The font size for the same
should be greater or equal to the largest font size used for any other
content
• The candidate should maintain and share the database of all the donors
• The above measures should be strictly monitored by the Election
commission

5. Implementation of Electoral Funding
Fund Requirement for election of MP
• Total fund required = 545(total number of seats) * 5 * 25 = 68125 lakhs
Assumptions:
– Average maximum allowable expanse by election commision = 25 lakh
– Average number of eligible candidates per seat = 5
– Equal contribution by both government and Corporate (By 10 % of mandatory
2% of profit expanse on CSR)
• The fund will be distributed to all the candidates who will be able to secure their
deposits
• It will be mandatory for all the candidate to share expanses by them or their
supporters which will audited by an independent body

6. Impact
• The Self regulation method of publishing detail of criminal record in every
promotional material should be able to decease the number of candidates
with criminal background by at least 50% at no cost as major parties will
not like their symbol along with number of cases
• The Electoral funding will with a cap on maximum expenditure will
remove the current effect of Asset on chance of winning election

7. Key Challenges and Mitigation Factors
The Self regulation
measures suggested
may not be legally
viable
The distribution of
money after the
election may not
serve the purpose
Concept
Risks
A law must be
passed
Provision for loan
from the fund on
the basis of past
performance or
collateral
Mitigation
factors
To monitor all the
promotional
material for the
compliance may be
difficult
Transparency in the
creation and
distribution of fund
Implementation
challenges Only the selected
vendors should have
license to publish
such promotional
materials
An independent
auditor should audit
the accounts
Mitigation
factors

8. Appendix
• Lok sabha election watch 2009: a compendium of state election watch reports by
ADR
• http://adrindia.org/content/nexus-between-elections-crime-and-money-ten-
years-election-watch
• Reforming India’s Party Financing and Election Expenditure Laws : By Gowda and
Sridharan