Blog

New Delhi: The Election Commission on Wednesday responded to the controversy over reported objections by two of its members to SIR-related decisions, saying internal notes, differing views and technical concerns are a routine part of deliberations and do not mean the final decisions were divided. The ECI maintains that all actions were lawful and that decisions on the nationwide SIR and other electoral reforms over the past year were unanimous.

The response comes after a report alleged that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi formally raised concerns multiple times over issues including voter deletions, electoral database access and changes to Form 6, triggering a fierce political backlash.

Expansive red flags allegedly raised by two Election Commissioners within the poll panel over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral has put the poll body’s functioning under scrutiny, with the Opposition accusing Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar of sidelining his fellow Commissioners and demanding his removal.

According to an India Express report, Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had flagged multiple issues, including deletion of names, in various states during the voter-roll cleanup. However, the Election Commission maintained that the poll body was unanimous in its decisions related to the pan-India SIR.

What Did The Two Election Commissioners Object To?

According to The Indian Express report, Sandhu and Joshi formally objected, on record, at least 14 times over the last 10 months to decisions and orders that they said were taken without their knowledge.

The report said the objections covered multiple aspects of the electoral-roll revision, including concerns over the deletion and addition of names. The two Commissioners reportedly raised objections four times on a single day.

The national rollout of the SIR has been under the supervision of all three Commissioners. However, the reported objections have raised questions over how key decisions connected to the exercise were being taken within the poll panel.

Here are the key issues flagged by the two Commissioners:

1. Alleged Unilateral Decision-Making

Sandhu and Joshi reportedly raised concerns that several crucial orders and communications were issued in the name of the Election Commission without their knowledge or approval.

According to the objections cited in the report, the two Commissioners questioned whether such decisions were consistent with the 2023 law governing the functioning of the poll panel, which provides for the transaction of ECI business unanimously wherever possible.

2. Concerns Over Centralisation Of Electoral Database

The two Commissioners also reportedly objected to what they described as the “gradual centralisation” of the digital electoral-roll database through the ECI’s internal IT divisions.

They argued that moving control away from local election authorities could weaken safeguards traditionally built around decentralised management of electoral rolls.

The Commissioners also questioned the authority of IT Director General Seema Khanna to restrict access to the database for state-level election officials and Electoral Registration Officers (EROs), who have statutory responsibilities relating to voter lists in their respective constituencies.

3. ‘Unauthorised And Illegal’ Changes To Form 6

Another point of contention was the modification of Form 6, which is used for new voter registrations.

According to the objections cited in the report, Sandhu specifically described the changes as “unauthorised and illegal” and called for them to be reversed.

Former chief election commissioner OP Rawat also separately criticised the changes to Form 6, describing them as “absolutely wrong and illegal”.

4. Software Glitches And Voter Deletions

The reported differences also extended to problems involving the digital electoral-roll system and its impact on local election officials.

One issue cited was from Goa, where software-related problems allegedly prevented election officials from recording eligibility data. According to the details cited in the report, this resulted in 97 eligible voters being excluded despite earlier Supreme Court interventions.

The objections also reportedly raised questions over a sharp increase in voter-deletion appeals in West Bengal.

In August 2026, Sandhu questioned who had authorised 16.10 lakh appeals seeking deletion of newly included voters in the state.

Election Commission Says It Was Unanimous On SIR

While the report has triggered questions over differences within the poll panel, officials said the Election Commission remained unanimous on decisions concerning the nationwide SIR.

This distinction is central to the controversy: the reported objections by two Commissioners relate to specific decisions and orders, while the poll body has maintained that there was no disagreement over the pan-India SIR itself.

The revelations have nevertheless brought the internal functioning of the three-member constitutional body under renewed scrutiny.

ECI’s Response: Internal Differences Are Part Of Deliberations

Responding to the controversy, the Election Commission said it functions as a multi-member constitutional body under Article 324 of the Constitution, statutory rules and established institutional conventions. It said written notes, observations, technical suggestions and internal checks-and-balances are a routine part of its functioning and are intended to ensure transparency, legal compliance and operational rigour.

The ECI said all its actions have been in accordance with the law and instructions of the Commission, while official orders, decisions and administrative directions carry full legal sanction and follow statutory procedures under the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.

The poll panel also said operational queries and inputs raised by Commissioners during the draft stage are part of the normal administrative process and are aimed at improving electoral procedures and safeguarding voter rights. It said differing views and observations are a normal part of institutional deliberations before a final decision is taken, adding that every officer of the Commission is authorised to offer suggestions to improve the electoral system.

On the reported objections over the past 10 months, the ECI said focusing on specific internal notes and observations “while overlooking the much larger body of approvals, decisions, instructions and initiatives” presents only one part of the picture. It said the Commission had taken numerous decisions, issued instructions, introduced around 40 new initiatives and undertaken electoral-roll revisions, including SIR, across the country, with all such decisions in the past year being unanimous decisions of the full Commission.

Addressing concerns over its digital electoral-roll systems, the ECI said platforms such as ECINet operate under strict data-security protocols to prevent unauthorised tampering and manipulation. It added that IT security checks and audit controls are standard cybersecurity measures used across national databases, while statutory authorities such as Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and District Election Officers (DEOs) continue to exercise their legal powers relating to voter registration and deletion.

The Commission also pointed to the successful conduct of major elections in Bihar, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, Assam and West Bengal during the period, involving extensive administrative machinery and numerous Commission approvals and instructions.

The ECI said it remains “fully committed to executing its constitutional duties with complete integrity”, while recognising its role in the country’s electoral and democratic process.

Why The SIR Row Has Turned Political

Congress general secretary in-charge communications Jairam Ramesh shared a screenshot of the Indian Express report on X.

Ramesh said that on behalf of the party, his colleague Abhishek Singhvi will be speaking in detail to the media on the sensational revelations made in the leading national newspaper on the way “the CEC has destroyed the credibility and integrity of the Election Commission of India”.

Congress general secretary in-charge organisation K C Venugopal said there is no doubt remaining that Kumar has no right to remain in office.

“How the hell can one man, acting on His Master’s orders, strike off names at whim? How can he sideline fellow Constitutional officers to only take blatantly illegal steps that put our democracy in danger?” he said.

“The right to vote is an essential Constitutional power given to every citizen, the fundamental bedrock of our democracy. If it is to be taken away, due process must be followed with utmost probity,” he said.

“Today, when we are staring at crores of genuine voters being excluded and a similar number of bogus voters being added to the rolls, it is clear that Gyanesh Kumar was the Chief Architect of the nationwide ‘Vote Chori’ exercise, with the the Modi top brass pulling the strings,” he alleged.

“We demand Gyanesh Kumar’s immediate removal and a Supreme Court-monitored impartial investigation to expose the rot that has destroyed the ECI’s credibility,” Venugopal said.

If Kumar remains in office, the people of India will come forward and make sure that our democracy is not destroyed by a mere bureaucrat, he added.

Pawan Khera: ‘Things Were Not Exactly Well Within ECI’

Congress’ media and publicity department head Pawan Khera also hit out at Kumar, saying he is “planted” and being “protected” by the BJP to hollow out the Election Commission of India from within.

“It was already known that things were not exactly well within the ECI. But just how messy, dysfunctional and, frankly, disturbing things had become is laid bare by this brilliant expose by @IndianExpress,” he said on X.

Kumar has to be the single most sold-out bureaucrat of the Modi era who has disenfranchised crores of Indians, and he must face the law, he alleged.

Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal demanded Kumar’s suspension and filing of an FIR to probe who is behind his actions.

Former CEC OP Rawat Calls Differences ‘Very Serious’ And ‘Unfortunate’

Former chief election commissioner O P Rawat said changes to the statutory voter registration Form 6 are “absolutely wrong and illegal”, while describing revelations of differences within the Election Commission as “very serious” and “unfortunate”.

Rawat also said the controversy should be resolved collectively by the Election Commissioners and the Chief Election Commissioner.

The immediate focus is likely to remain on the nature of the objections reportedly recorded by Sandhu and Joshi, the decisions they concerned, and the Election Commission’s position that it was unanimous on the nationwide SIR.

The controversy also puts the spotlight on the decision-making process within the three-member poll panel and the extent to which disagreements between its members are formally recorded and communicated.

source