Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, Sept 23: The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Wednesday refuted a report in a section of the media about differences in the poll body between the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and the Election Commissioners and claimed that all its actions have been in accordance with the relevant laws and instructions and that all the decisions were taken in the last one year either unanimously or by majority while stating that the differing views were a normal part of deliberations in any institution. Responding to reports of “illegal” decisions and dissent within the ECI, the poll body said any operational queries or inputs raised by Commission members during draft stages are part of standard administrative practice, aimed at safeguarding voter rights. The suggestions given by the Commissioners were for further improving the electoral processes, it added.
The ECI was responding to a report in a section of the media on Wednesday which claimed that two of the three Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, had formally recorded objections at least 14 times over 10 months, saying major decisions were being made in the name of the full Election Commission without their knowledge — several of which they called “unauthorised and illegal.”
The ECI claimed that the media report wrongly highlighted “certain specific” internal notes or observations spread over a 10-month period while overlooking the much larger body of approvals, decisions, instructions, and initiatives give only “one part of the picture.”
The ECI first issued a source-based clarification to the report. “All decisions of the Election Commission of India, including SIR [the ongoing special intensive revision of electoral rolls], have been unanimous and with the approval of both the Election Commissioners and the Chief Election Commissioner,” the clarification said.
A formal, written statement followed. “The Commission operates as a multi-member constitutional body. Written notes, observations, technical suggestions and internal checks-and-balances are standard, ongoing practices designed to ensure complete transparency, legal compliance and operational rigour. All actions of ECI have been in accordance of laws and instructions of the Commission,” it said.
The poll body said differing views and observations were a normal part of deliberation in any institution and were part of the decision-making process before a final decision was taken. “Not only the three Commissioners, but every officer of the Commission is fully authorised to give his suggestions to the Commission for improving the electoral system,” the statement said.
In recent months, the Commission has taken numerous decisions, issued instructions, introduced around 40 new initiatives, and undertaken many electoral reforms, including the conduct of electoral roll revisions (including the SIR) across the country. All these decisions were an outcome of the unanimous decisions of the full Commission over the past year, it said.
“All official orders, decisions and administrative directions issued by the Commission carry full legal sanctions and follow established statutory procedures under The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023,” the statement said.
The media report had claimed that both the Election Commissioners had red-flagged several key issues, including the changes made to Form 6, which is used for fresh voter registrations, and the gradual centralisation of the electoral roll database. They warned that “centralised software now overrides ground-level Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) decisions, blocking eligible voters,” the report said.
In its response, the Commission said its digital platforms, such as ECINet, operate under strict data security protocols to prevent unauthorised tampering and manipulation. IT security checks and audit controls were standard cybersecurity measures implemented across national databases. Statutory authorities, including Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and District Election Officers (DEOs), function as per statutory powers for registration and deletion under law, it said.
Following is the Full statement of the Election Commission refuting the media report:
“The ECI is a constitutional body that functions under the strict mandate of Article 324 of the Constitution, statutory rules, and established institutional conventions. The Commission operates as a multi-member constitutional body. Written notes, observations, technical suggestions, and internal checks and balances are standard, ongoing practices designed to ensure complete transparency, legal compliance, and operational rigour. All actions of the ECI have been in accordance of laws and instructions of the Commission.
“All official orders, decisions and administrative directions issued by the Commission carry full legal sanctions and follow established statutory procedures under The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.
“Any operational queries or inputs raised by Commission members during draft stages are part of standard administrative practice aimed at safeguarding voter rights. The suggestions given by the Commissioners were for further improving the electoral processes.
“Differing views and observations are a normal part of deliberation in any institution. They are a part of the decision-making process before a final decision is taken. Not only the three Commissioners, but every officer of the Commission is fully authorised to give his suggestions to the Commission for improving the electoral system.
“Highlighting certain specific internal notes/observations spread over the period of 10 months while overlooking the much larger body of approvals, decisions, instructions and initiatives gives only one part of the picture. In recent months, the Commission has taken numerous decisions, issued instructions, introduced around 40 new initiatives, and undertaken many electoral reforms, including the conduct of Electoral roll revision (including SIR) across the country. All these decisions are an outcome of the unanimous decisions of the full Commission in the past year.
“The Commission has recently successfully conducted major elections of Bihar, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, Assam and West Bengal and election-related exercises during this period. This work involved wide-ranging administrative and operational machinery and many Commission approvals and instructions.
“The Commission’s digital platforms, such as ECINet, operate under strict data security protocols to prevent unauthorised tampering, manipulation, etc. IT security checks and audit controls are standard cybersecurity measures implemented across national databases. Statutory authorities, including Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and District Election Officers (DEOs), function as per statutory powers for registration and deletion under law.
“The Election Commission of India remains fully committed to executing its constitutional duties with complete integrity, recognising its vital role in advancing our democracy.
The ECI’s statement is likely to face a strong pushback from Opposition parties as they have instead demanded a point-by-point rebuttal to the report which very specifically pointed out that Sandhu and Joshi had raised formal objections at least 14 times over 10 months, including concerns about changes to Form 6 and the centralisation of electoral roll data.
Already, the report has opened a new and much more volatile front in the long battle between the Opposition and the ruling BJP over the ECI’s voter roll cleanup exercise, Special Intensive Revision (SIR), which the Opposition alleged was a sophisticated process to exclude voters for the BJP’s gain.
The Congress party today alleged the ECI may not be working as an independent body anymore. Rahul Gandhi led the charge with his opening attack that set the path open for the rest of the Congress party’s leaders to punch through. “Vote chori is a crime against the Indian people and a direct attack on our constitution. The BJP, RSS and EC who organised it have committed an act of treason. Justice will be served,” he wrote in a post on X.
Former chief election commissioner SY Quraishi said he was happy to know that the two election commissioners had been “very silently and quietly protesting” which made him change his views about them from what he assumed earlier.
“I have been criticising the innovation of the Special Intensive Revision from the beginning and all the procedures and regularities which were being followed. I was still a bit hesitant, but now that we have the inside story of the two election commissioners. In fact I was critical of the two CECs over why they were keeping quiet,” Quraishi said.
“They were also equal members with equal voting rights and a decision was taken either unanimously or by a majority of two. So why aren’t they speaking? But I realised that very silently and quietly they were protesting, they were writing notes. That is a good thing that they have gone up in my esteem, otherwise I was losing respect for them,” he said.