ECI breaks silence on SIR row: Poll body says all decisions were ‘unanimous’ despite differences

The ECI, in a post on X, stressed that it is a multi-member constitutional body functioning under Article 324 of the Constitution and follows transparency, legal procedures and internal checks while making decisions.

The clarification came after an investigation report by The Indian Express claimed that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had formally raised objections at least 14 times over 10 months to decisions and orders concerning electoral rolls and SIR.

ECI says differing views are part of deliberations

The poll panel said differences of opinion among Commissioners and observations raised during internal discussions were a normal part of the decision-making process.

"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," the ECI said.

It added that all three Commissioners, as well as officers of the Commission, are authorised to offer suggestions aimed at improving the electoral system.

"Not only the three Commissioners, but every officer of the Commission is fully authorized to give his suggestions to the Commission for improving the electoral system," the poll body said.

Commission cites electoral reforms and SIR

The ECI said that in recent months it had taken numerous decisions, issued instructions and introduced around 40 initiatives as part of electoral reforms.

These included electoral-roll revisions, including SIR, as well as the conduct of elections in several states.

The Commission said these measures were the outcome of unanimous decisions by the full panel over the past year.

"All these decisions are an outcome of the unanimous decisions of the full commission in the past one year," the ECI said.

Response follows report of internal objections

The ECI's statement follows the Indian Express investigation, which reported that Sandhu and Joshi had objected on record to several decisions concerning voter registration, deletion and restoration of names, electoral-roll databases and aspects of the SIR process.

The report said some of the objections concerned decisions that the two Commissioners said were taken without their knowledge or approval.

The ECI has rejected the suggestion that such differences represented a split within the three-member Commission, maintaining that the final decisions were unanimous.

Representational Photo: SC website/ChatGPT

Opposition reacts

Opposition parties have targeted Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, demanding his removal and a court-monitored probe.

Congress MP K.C. Venugopal demanded the immediate removal of Kumar and called for a Supreme Court-monitored investigation.

Venugopal accused the CEC of unilaterally removing voters' names and centralising control over electoral rolls.

Mamata All India Trinamool Congress (MAITC) national general secretary and MP Abhishek Banerjee also demanded Kumar's removal and a court-monitored investigation.

Banerjee alleged that the disenfranchisement of voters was being carried out to benefit a political party and called for those responsible to be held accountable.

Samajwadi Party chief and Lok Sabha MP Akhilesh Yadav described the findings as "extremely serious".