Election Commissioners' Recorded Dissents Trigger Opposition Demand for CEC Gyanesh Kumar's Removal

Opposition parties on Wednesday demanded the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar after a news report said two of the three Election Commissioners had formally recorded objections at least 14 times over ten months, alleging that significant decisions were taken in the name of the full Commission without their knowledge.

The report, published in The Indian Express, said Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi described several of those decisions as "unauthorised and illegal". The Election Commission of India has rejected the suggestion of any irregularity.

"All decisions of the Election Commission of India, including SIR, have been unanimous and with the approval of both the Election Commissioners and the Chief Election Commissioner," Commission sources said in response.

What the report says

According to the report, the two Commissioners raised concerns on several fronts, chiefly the centralisation of electoral rolls. In May, Election Commissioner Vivek Joshi is said to have proposed an audit to certify that "no one except the concerned statutory authorities has any credentials to make any change in the [voter] database".

In August, Election Commissioner Sandhu is reported to have recorded that State-level election officials were telling the Commission they did not have "proper and complete access" to the ERONet portal, the digital system through which electoral rolls are maintained. He further noted that the Commission's Director-General of IT, Seema Khanna, "does not have any legal authority to restrict proper and complete access and freedom to operate as given by law to the statutory authorities".

The report also states that Form 6, used by new voters to register, was altered to ask whether the applicant or their parents or grandparents "exist" in the electoral roll of the last Special Intensive Revision. Mr. Joshi is said to have warned in May that a statutory form cannot be changed without amending the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, and Mr. Sandhu is reported to have agreed in August, calling the change "unauthorised and illegal" and seeking its immediate removal.

Two other matters were flagged, according to the report. Mr. Sandhu is said to have questioned who authorised the Commission in West Bengal to file appeals against voters whom judicial tribunals had already included in the rolls, with around 38 lakh appeals reported to be pending. In Goa, 97 voters found eligible by local Electoral Registration Officers after a Supreme Court-mandated hearing were reportedly left off the final roll because the centrally controlled software had no mechanism to record the EROs' decision, despite the Chief Electoral Officer's office writing eight times seeking a rollback option.

Opposition reaction

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge said in a post on X that the questions raised by the party were "proving to be correct" and described the matter as "tampering with democracy". Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi characterised the allegations as "vote theft", calling it an offence against the people of India and a direct attack on the Constitution.

Congress leader K.C. Venugopal demanded a Supreme Court-monitored, impartial investigation to "expose the rot that has destroyed the ECI's credibility", and the parties urged the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognisance of the report.

Trinamool Congress leader Mamata Banerjee said the Indian National Developmental, Inclusive Alliance bloc would meet soon to decide its next steps, including a public awareness campaign. She demanded that Mr. Kumar be arrested and that criminal proceedings begin, and repeated her allegation that mandates in West Bengal, Bihar, Haryana and Madhya Pradesh had been "stolen", calling for fresh elections in those States. Congress veteran Ashok Gehlot echoed the demand that Mr. Kumar be "put behind bars".

These are political allegations. No court has substantiated claims of electoral fraud, and the Commission has denied them.

The legal position

The Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, governs appointments to the Commission, which is a constitutional body under Article 324. Under Article 324(5), the Chief Election Commissioner can be removed from office only in the manner and on the grounds applicable to a judge of the Supreme Court, a process that requires parliamentary action and is not open to executive decision.