The country’s major Opposition parties have been strongly criticising the Election Commission of India (ECI) for quite some time. In particular, several key leaders have raised many doubts over the functioning of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. Many have strongly criticised him, alleging that he has turned the electoral system into a weapon favouring the BJP, which is in power at the Centre. Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi, along with leaders of major political parties in the country, has also strongly criticised him. In particular, he has been facing allegations that, in the name of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, large numbers of votes are being deleted, thereby paving the way for a BJP victory. Against this backdrop, a report published by the prominent English daily The Indian Express on Wednesday has caused a major stir across the country. At the same time, recent remarks made by the Chief Justice of India on SIR have also created further controversy. The Supreme Court expressed dissatisfaction that notices under SIR were being issued in a completely mechanical manner. It directed the Election Commission to explain the basis on which the notices were being issued.
According to The Indian Express report, over the past 10 months, two Election Commissioners have raised objections to the Election Commission’s actions on 14 occasions. Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi reportedly objected to the addition of new voters and deletion of names from the electoral rolls without their knowledge. Both of them described these actions as unauthorised and illegal. SIR began in Bihar in June 2025. Since then, as part of this revision, which is generally viewed as a process of cleaning up electoral rolls, more than 13 crore names have been removed from the draft electoral rolls across 30 States and Union Territories. The report stated that this has led to intense public debate across the country over the role of the Election Commission in deciding who should have the right to vote and who should not. It also stated that the voter database was centralised in Delhi by bypassing election officials of the states. The Commissioners who expressed concerns over the integrity of the voter software and disagreed with this move reportedly also took the matter to the Cabinet Secretary.
This points to unusual differences within the Election Commission and has raised questions over its functioning. Soon after The Indian Express story was published, political parties across the country once again strongly attacked CEC Gyanesh Kumar. Looking at these developments, there are growing doubts that the allegations being levelled against the Election Commission over the past few years may be true. As the entire issue caused a major stir across the country, the Election Commission also issued an official response. However, rather than addressing the key questions raised in The Indian Express story, the response has led to further questions. The main points in the ECI’s explanation are as follows: The Commission said that highlighting only certain specific internal notes and observations from a 10-month period, while overlooking the much larger body of approvals, decisions, instructions and initiatives, presents only one part of the picture.
In recent months, the Election Commission has taken several decisions, issued instructions and introduced around 40 new initiatives. It has also undertaken several electoral reforms, including the revision of electoral rolls (SIR) across the country. It stated that all these actions were the outcome of unanimous decisions taken by the full Commission during the past year. The Commission said that any operational questions or suggestions raised by its members during the draft stages are part of the standard administrative process followed to safeguard voters’ rights. The suggestions made by the Election Commissioners were aimed at further improving the electoral process. Differences of opinion and observations are normal in the deliberative process of any institution. They are part of the decision-making process before a final decision is taken. It also stated that not only the three Commissioners, but every officer of the Election Commission, is fully authorised to provide suggestions to the Commission for improving the electoral system. The Election Commission further explained that all official orders, decisions and administrative directions issued by it have full legal sanction and follow the statutory procedures prescribed under The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.