Bengaluru, August 12, 2026: Former Karnataka chief minister Siddaramaiah has argued that corruption in politics cannot be effectively tackled without comprehensive electoral reforms, saying that the influence of money, caste, religion and muscle power continues to shape elections in India.
In an article published by The Times of India, Siddaramaiah said his recent remarks about not contesting future elections had triggered political debate. He acknowledged that his long career in public life could invite questions about his comments on corruption, but maintained that the concerns he raised reflect realities that many politicians privately recognise.
Money and influence remain major election challenges
Siddaramaiah said election campaigns have become increasingly expensive and that the financial demands of contesting elections can create an environment in which candidates depend heavily on wealthy supporters and other sources of funding.
According to him, campaign financiers may expect favourable treatment after a government comes to power, creating a cycle in which political funding and governance become closely connected. He argued that this can undermine ethical administration and create opportunities for corruption.
He also pointed out that although the Election Commission sets expenditure limits for candidates, actual campaign spending can exceed the prescribed limits. Such high costs, he said, can discourage honest, educated and socially committed people from entering electoral politics.
Why electoral reform is linked to corruption
Siddaramaiah's central argument is that corruption should not be viewed only as a problem of individual politicians or government departments. He said weaknesses in the electoral system itself can contribute to the conditions that allow corruption to flourish.
Political parties and candidates require substantial resources to contest elections, while competition for votes can encourage the use of money and other forms of influence. If these structural pressures remain unchanged, introducing additional governance laws alone may not be sufficient to address the problem.
He therefore called for meaningful electoral reform alongside broader administrative and institutional reforms.
Several reform proposals already exist
Siddaramaiah noted that various committees have examined India's electoral challenges over the years. The Dinesh Goswami Committee looked at electoral reforms and the role of money, while the Vohra Committee examined the criminalisation of politics. The Indrajit Gupta Committee considered the issue of state funding of elections, and the Law Commission has also made several recommendations.
India has already introduced a number of electoral and political reforms. These include the anti-defection law, lowering the voting age to 18, electronic voting machines, mandatory disclosure of candidates' assets and criminal records, disclosure of educational qualifications, the NOTA option and provisions for disqualification of convicted legislators.
However, Siddaramaiah argued that implementation has not always prevented political actors from finding ways around the intended purpose of these measures.
Questions over the first-past-the-post system
The former Karnataka chief minister also raised a broader question about India's electoral system itself. He pointed to instances where the distribution of seats has not directly reflected the overall vote share.
He cited the 2018 Karnataka Assembly election, where Congress received a higher vote share than the BJP but won fewer seats. He also referred to the 2024 Lok Sabha election, in which the BJP won 240 seats with roughly 37% of the national vote, while parties collectively receiving about 63% of the vote accounted for the remaining 303 seats.
These examples, he argued, raise questions about whether the first-past-the-post system always provides an accurate representation of the popular mandate.
Proportional representation debate
Siddaramaiah also recalled that Dr B.R. Ambedkar had expressed reservations about the existing electoral model and had considered proportional representation worthy of serious consideration.
A proportional representation system could potentially produce a closer relationship between the percentage of votes received by political parties and the number of seats they obtain. However, changing India's electoral system would be a major constitutional and political decision and would require extensive national debate.
Political consensus needed
The larger message from Siddaramaiah is that electoral reform should become a national political priority rather than an issue confined to individual parties.
Greater transparency in political funding, stronger enforcement of expenditure rules, measures against criminalisation and improvements in political accountability are among the issues that remain central to the debate.
Ultimately, he argued that strengthening democracy requires reforms that address the incentives and structures surrounding elections themselves. Without such changes, efforts to fight political corruption may continue to address symptoms without sufficiently tackling the system that enables them.
The debate also highlights a broader challenge for Indian democracy: how to make elections more transparent, affordable and representative while ensuring that voters—not money, social divisions or political muscle—remain at the centre of the electoral process.
Also Read: Rahul Gandhi Moves SC Against Allahabad HC Assets Probe