India, May 25 -- Opposition leaders in Punjab have accused the ruling party of orchestrating widespread electoral malpractices during the ongoing municipal polls, including mass rejection of nomination papers. The rejection of over 700 nomination papers has evoked widespread protests. However, this is not something new for Punjab. During the SAD-BJP regime (2007 to 2017), the Congress raised similar charges against the government. Under the Congress rule (2017 to 2022), the Akalis and AAP cried foul against the party in power. Today, the AAP finds itself facing the very allegations it once hurled at others. For over two decades, the playbook of political parties in Punjab has remained unchanged: When in Opposition, loudly proclaim the need for free and fair elections to preserve the sanctity of democracy, and when in power, blatantly adopt the same electoral malpractices that you had vehemently condemned while sitting in Opposition. Unfortunately, no party has shown the will to change the rigged system. Rather, every ruling party justifies its wrongdoing by pointing to the "sins" of its predecessor. "How can we forget what they did to us?" is the common refrain. "What we are doing is no different from what the others did when in power!" is the justification given every time by the unrepentant rulers. And the cycle of malpractice grinds on unchecked. The tragedy for Punjab is that despite the rot spreading deeper with every election, the electoral malpractices have been normalised and are now accepted as routine politics. Regrettably, many people are losing faith in the system, having seen over the years that only the actors change while the script remains the same. Waning trust in the system portends intensification of protests and deepening polarisation. Punjab, already on the brink of economic abyss, cannot afford further instability. Therefore, the people's hopes and faith in the system must be kept alive by reforming the system. The first step towards free and fair elections should be amending the archaic nomination process, which is prone to misuse and attracts the highest number of complaints. Rule 36 of the Punjab's Municipal Election Rules-1994 mandates that every nomination paper must be filed personally in Form 20 by the candidate or his proposer within the prescribed hours. This seemingly innocuous procedural requirement provides a perfect gateway for abuse and ruling parties have long exploited it with impunity. The requirement of personal presence at a specified time creates myriad opportunities for abuse. In the past, there have been countless instances of opposition candidates being prevented from reaching the RO office by use of muscle power or with police help. Many times, despite having waited for hours, candidates are simply told that that they did not reach in time. Requiring a hard copy of the nomination form also provides ample opportunities for manipulation: Returning officers, under pressure from party bosses, can suddenly discover technical flaws in opposition papers while overlooking glaring mistakes in ruling party nominations. Overzealous officials can easily remove important documents such as municipal tax receipts or NOC attached with the nomination papers for getting the nomination rejected. Papers are also known to have been rejected for absurd reasons: a minor spelling error, an innocuous overwrite, or a last-minute unverified encroachment report. The result? Hundreds of opposition candidates are knocked out before the race even begins. Democracy doesn't stumble at the ballot box - it collapses during the nomination process itself at the desk of the very officer sworn to conduct free and fair elections. Fortunately, the solution to this problem is quite simple: enable online filing of nominations. This single reform will eliminate most avenues of abuse related to the nomination process. Candidates will be able to submit their papers securely from home or party offices, free from the risk of being obstructed enroute to the returning officer's desk. Furthermore, digital submission, backed by secure verification, would create electronic records that are far harder to tamper with. More importantly, these records would be available for scrutiny by higher courts in cases of wrongful rejection. Even the most pliable RO would think twice before rejecting a nomination on frivolous grounds. The battle will shift from RO's office to the polling booth, where the people will decide the fate of their candidates. However, it is doubtful whether any political party will have the will to bring in any reform. If political actors remain unwilling, then courts, civil society, and public opinion must step in to demand change. Only sustained pressure from outside the political class can bring in this reform and restore democracy in the hands of the people....