Political confrontation grows after reports of objections by two Election Commissioners; ECI maintains that differences of opinion are part of institutional deliberations
New Delhi, September 23. (SDNA) The political controversy surrounding the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls intensified on Wednesday after Aam Aadmi Party national convenor and former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal called for action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, cancellation of the SIR exercise and fresh elections.
Kejriwal’s demands came after a report by The Indian Express claimed that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had formally raised objections on several occasions over decisions relating to electoral-roll procedures during the past 10 months.
Kejriwal Questions Functioning of Election Commission
Reacting to the report, Kejriwal alleged that the Election Commission had effectively been functioning under the CEC’s direction without adequate involvement of the other Election Commissioners.
He called for the SIR exercise to be withdrawn and sought restoration of the electoral rolls from three years earlier. He also demanded that elections conducted recently be cancelled and held afresh.
According to reports, Kejriwal further demanded the arrest of CEC Gyanesh Kumar and called for criminal proceedings against him. These are political demands made by Kejriwal and do not constitute a judicial finding against the CEC.
Reports of Objections by Two Election Commissioners
The controversy centres on an investigation published by The Indian Express, which reported that Sandhu and Joshi had raised formal objections at least 14 times during the past 10 months.
The reported concerns covered several aspects of electoral-roll management, including the addition of new voters, deletion and restoration of names, changes to voter-registration procedures, appeals against deletion decisions and the handling and security of electoral databases.
One reported issue involved changes to Form 6, which is used for voter registration. The report said the two Election Commissioners had questioned the manner in which certain changes were introduced.
The investigation also reported concerns about what it described as the gradual centralisation of electoral-roll data and questions regarding access and control over voter databases.
However, reported internal objections do not by themselves establish that the electoral process or any particular election was legally invalid. Any such conclusion would depend on the relevant legal and judicial processes.
Election Commission Rejects Rift Narrative
The Election Commission has disputed the interpretation that the reported observations demonstrate a breakdown in decision-making within the poll panel.
The ECI said that differences of opinion, suggestions and observations are a normal part of institutional deliberations. It maintained that its official decisions, including those concerning SIR, were taken with the approval of the full Commission.
The Commission also said that focusing on individual internal notes or observations without considering the wider body of decisions and initiatives could present only part of the overall picture.
According to the Commission, all major decisions taken by it over the past year, including those connected with electoral-roll revision and SIR, were ultimately unanimous.
SIR Has Become a Major Electoral Issue
The SIR exercise has emerged as a major point of political and legal debate because of its impact on electoral rolls across several states and Union Territories.
According to the reported investigation, the exercise has been implemented in phases since it was first launched in Bihar and has subsequently expanded to a large part of the country. More than 13 crore names were removed from draft electoral rolls across 30 States and Union Territories, according to the report, although the reasons for individual deletions and the subsequent claims and appeals remain subject to the prescribed verification process.
The process has also faced judicial scrutiny. In West Bengal, for example, a large number of voters have filed appeals seeking restoration of their names following the SIR exercise. The Election Commission recently informed the Supreme Court that more than 22 lakh of the voters removed from the rolls had filed appeals for reinstatement.
Political and Legal Debate Continues
The latest developments have brought the Election Commission’s internal decision-making, electoral-roll management and the legal framework governing SIR into sharper public focus.
Opposition parties have cited the reported objections of the two Election Commissioners to demand greater scrutiny of the exercise and the functioning of the Commission. The Election Commission, on the other hand, maintains that its decisions have been taken through the established institutional process and that differences expressed during deliberations are not evidence of institutional failure.
The controversy is therefore unfolding on two parallel fronts—political demands for accountability and the Election Commission’s defence of its decision-making process. Further judicial and institutional proceedings will determine how the issues surrounding SIR and the electoral rolls develop.