ECI rejects reports of rift among commissioners over SIR, cites unanimous decisions

An investigation in The Indian Express has raised serious questions about the functioning of the Election Commission. Over the past 10 months, two of its three Election Commissioners recorded at least 14 formal, on-record objections to decisions taken in the Commission’s name. They said some of those decisions were taken without their knowledge. This included a changed Form 6 tying new voter registration to the last SIR held in the early 2000s, restricted access to the electoral roll database (ERONet/ECINet) for EROs, unauthorised appeals filed in West Bengal against court-restored voters, and a software glitch that left 97 eligible voters off Goa's final rolls. The disquiet within the poll body is described as unprecedented.The Election Commission of India is under fire like never before. The SIR has struck 13 crore names off draft rolls, putting the EC at the centre of intense public debate over its role in deciding who gets to vote — and who doesn’t.HOWEVER, what nobody knew: through that same… pic.twitter.com/CC1QIdqk1L— Ritika Chopra (@RitikaChopra__) September 23, 2026 While the Express investigation has triggered a full-blown political and media storm, the first response to the story came via unnamed sources cited across TV news channels and. Only later did the Commission issue a statement in its own name, saying all its decisions had been unanimous.The Election Commission of India is under fire like never before. The SIR has struck 13 crore names off draft rolls, putting the EC at the centre of intense public debate over its role in deciding who gets to vote — and who doesn’t.HOWEVER, what nobody knew: through that same… pic.twitter.com/CC1QIdqk1L— Ritika Chopra (@RitikaChopra__) September 23, 2026 Former CECs weigh in on riftNewslaundry spoke to former CECs to get their opinion on the matter.The former Chief Election Commissioner OP Rawat called the allegations in The Indian Express report as both “unfortunate” and “unprecedented” in the institution’s history. Rawat told Newslaundry that during their tenure at the ECI, dissenting viewpoints were typically resolved through open discussion and consensus building within meetings, resulting in largely unanimous decisions. He emphasised that there is no hierarchy between the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners, noting that if two commissioners form a majority against the CEC’s stance, their majority view legally prevails. On the integrity of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process, he acknowledged that while procedural infirmities existed, the commission had continuously worked to rectify them. However, he raised his concern over a recent appellate tribunal ruling in West Bengal, where over a lakh appeals were disposed of, revealing that 93% of disenfranchised individuals were actually eligible voters whose names had been deleted. Terming the wrongful deletion of legitimate voters “criminal,” Rawat stressed that such lapses must never be repeated. He added that the allegations of circumventing internal dissent must first be officially checked and it should be found out “whether the dissent was merely oral and remained unrecorded in official minutes.”We also approached former Chief Election Commissioner TS Krishnamurthy. He told Newslaundry about how dissenting opinions were dealt with during his tenure: “Fortunately, we used to iron out our differences. We used to have unanimous decisions. If there was some difference of opinion, we used to discuss it and find a workable solution.” He added that if there is no unanimous decision, the law clearly says that the majority view should be considered.On the integrity of SIR, Krishnamurthy said that there is a need “to preserve the purity of the electoral roll” and “it is the responsibility of the Election Commission.” However, he added, “The only thing is they [ECI] should give enough time to ensure that there are no complaints.”When asked about the ECs reaching out to the cabinet secretary, he said, “The cabinet secretary has no role at all as far as the work allocation is concerned. The Chief Election Commissioner is a constitutional authority. He decides the issues.” Also, he added, “It’s a multi-member body in which all decisions are taken in discussion during the presence of all the Election Commissioners. It cannot be individually taken. Every important operational decision has to be done collectively. It is not allocated to any individual.”Former Chief Election Commissioner SY Quraishi told PTI, “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 that why were they keeping quiet, they are equal members with equal voting rights and decisions are 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.”The Indian Express series mentions specific instances of dissent, including one in 2019, when then-EC Ashok Lavasa wrote to CEC Sunil Arora. It also mentions another instance of dissent in 2009, linked to then-CEC N Gopalaswami. But in those cases, the report notes, the dissent was around a specific issue.“This time, however, two Commissioners who make up the majority are not dissenting on decisions they have been overruled on. They are putting on record that decisions were taken, orders issued and cases filed and they are in the dark. Clearly, the Commission, that the 2023 Act requires to act ‘as far as possible, unanimously’, has not.”EC responds via ‘sources’ and then a statementThe Election Commission’s first response to the investigation came via a WhatsApp message circulated to beat reporters. Several outlets published this message, attributing it to “EC sources”. Times Now went a step further, calling them “top sources” while reporting the claim that all three commissioners had made decisions unanimously.Row Over 'Internal Rift' in ECITop ECI Sources to TIMES NOW on S.I.R.: - No formal dissent by any Election Commissioner- Observations were looked into- All 3 commissioners signed the decisions- SIR orders were unanimous— TIMES NOW (@TimesNow) September 23, 2026 The Times of India ran a byline story citing “EC sources” who spoke to PTI, not even its own reporter, claiming that all decisions taken by the Commission, including those related to the SIR, “were unanimous and had the approval of the Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, as well as Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.” Hindustan Times ran a similar story, also attributed to “EC sources”. NDTV, India Today, News18 and other channels followed suit with the same source-based reportage. No one from the Election Commission came on record.#BREAKING | "No Dissent By Any Election Commissioner": Sources As Opposition Targets Gyanesh Kumar https://t.co/gC6QJDNrGpNDTV's @aishvaryjain joins @divyawadhwa with more details pic.twitter.com/ojorw3Dahy— NDTV (@ndtv) September 23, 2026 #BreakingNews | Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi recorded objections at least 14 times over 10 months concerning decisions they said were taken without their knowledgeThe ECI has since said that all decisions, including SIR-related decisions, had unanimous approval of all… pic.twitter.com/Q7UozPFQPb— News18 (@CNNnews18) September 23, 2026 Opposition launches fierce attack on EC. Listen in to what Cong's Kapil Sibal said.India Today's @tweets_amit with more details.#ElectionCommission #SIRExercise #ITVideo @PoojaShali pic.twitter.com/DnXR5bHqxX— IndiaToday (@IndiaToday) September 23, 2026 Zee News featured Kejriwal’s press conference while running tickers that amplified what the EC sources were trying to convey. At least one of these did not even attribute the claim to EC sources. One ticker, for instance, said: “Dono chunaav aayukt-CEC milkar faisle lete hain.”Aaj Tak had a detailed segment featuring two anchors and two correspondents discussing the Indian Express report and its ramifications. Times Now Navbharat’s coverage centred on ECI sources pushing back against reports that Election Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi had dissented over SIR-related decisions in the past 10 months. The channel’s sources insisted that all major decisions, including those on the SIR, were reached by majority vote among the three commissioners, and that what was being called “dissent” was actually routine observations raised during Commission meetings.Republic Bharat uploaded press conferences by Kejriwal and Akhilesh Yadav, as well as a segment where its reporter asked whether Gyanesh Kumar would step forward with his own version.Clearly, not everyone was convinced by the “sources”.Indian Express is doing investigation and The Times of India is quoting sources to defend election commission https://t.co/AxHeGa0BKW— Piyush Rai (@Benarasiyaa) September 23, 2026 ज्ञानेश कुमार के सूत्र एक्टिव हो गए हैं . प्लांटर्स ड्यूटी पर लग गए हैं . https://t.co/gX04hEPiNm— Ajit Anjum (@ajitanjum) September 23, 2026 The story of @RitikaChopra__ gets confirmed, almost, by the sources who have talked to @PTI . https://t.co/0zty1ipOy1— Sheela Bhatt शीला भट्ट (@sheela2010) September 23, 2026 The ECI subsequently issued a press release saying it is a multi-member constitutional body functioning under Article 324 of the Constitution, statutory rules and established institutional conventions. Official Press Note pic.twitter.com/xIQvXHqMSt— Election Commission of India (@ECISVEEP) September 23, 2026 It said written notes, observations, technical suggestions and internal checks and balances are part of its standard functioning and are aimed at ensuring transparency, legal compliance and operational rigour. All actions of the Commission, it said, have been in accordance with the law and its instructions.The Commission said differing views and observations are a normal part of deliberations before a final decision is taken. It said operational queries or suggestions raised by Commissioners during the draft stage are part of standard administrative practice aimed at safeguarding voters’ rights and improving electoral processes. “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 give only one part of the picture,” it said, adding that all decisions taken by the full Commission over the past year were unanimous.The ECI also said its digital platforms, including ECINet, operate under strict data-security protocols, while Electoral Registration Officers and District Election Officers exercise their statutory powers for voter registration and deletion under law. The Commission said it remains committed to carrying out its constitutional duties “with complete integrity”.Opposition questions EC functioningMeanwhile, Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi posted on X, “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.” AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal called for Gyanesh Kumar’s arrest.On the supremacy of CEC, Congress MP and senior lawyer of Supreme Court Abhishek Manu Singhvi said, “The Supreme Court clarified that the Election Commission is a multi-member body. The Court provided a clear answer stating that all Election Commissioners are equal. The CEC is not superior to the other ECs; the CEC is merely ‘first among equals’. Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, said the matter was “extremely serious” for democracy: “...if there are no elections, then where is democracy? If elections are unfair and rigged in any manner, then the Election Commission is assisting in that. If the Election Commissioner is not only aware of it but also allowing it to happen, then it is a very serious assault on democracy. It is an act of treason.”After the report, AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal held a press conference at his office. He said, “Through this press conference, we demand that Gyanesh Kumar, the Chief Election Commissioner, should be arrested and prosecuted. All the elections held in the last few years should be cancelled and held again.“The Election Commission is not the name of one individual. It comprises three members — one Chief Election Commissioner and two Election Commissioners. All three participate in meetings, where decisions are taken either unanimously or by majority. None of the three has the authority to make decisions individually. No single person can run the Election Commission or issue orders to its officers.“The Chief Election Commissioner is described in English as ‘First Among Equals’. All three are equal. The Chief Election Commissioner only chairs and presides over the meetings and does not have any additional authority,” he said.Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav also questioned the credibility of the Election Commission over the reported differences between the Election Commissioners and CEC Gyanesh Kumar. He alleged that SP voters had been “systematically deleted” from the electoral rolls and claimed that despite the party bringing the issue to the Commission’s notice, no action was taken. Referring to the elections in Bihar and West Bengal, Yadav alleged that the West Bengal polls were “looted” through the use of central forces and claimed that the “UP model” was expanded to West Bengal. “The Election Commission claims it will strengthen democracy. When such things are happening within the Election Commission itself, where can one place their trust?” he asked, referring to the reported 14 instances of officials raising objections over a 10-month period.Meanwhile, CPI(M) Rajya Sabha MP John Brittas has written to President Droupadi Murmu, seeking her urgent constitutional intervention to “safeguard the integrity of the Election Commission, the electoral rolls and the democratic franchise”. In his letter, Brittas raised concerns over the functioning of the poll panel following the report and sought the President’s intervention on the issues highlighted in it.A quarter-century of Modi governance calls for questions and a hamper. To mark the occasion, we have offers for subscribers and other readers.

The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Wednesday rejected reports of an internal rift among its three members over the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, saying all final decisions taken by the poll panel have been unanimous.The clarification came after an Indian Express investigation reported that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded at least 14 objections over 10 months to decisions and orders linked to the SIR exercise.Official Press Note pic.twitter.com/xIQvXHqMSt— Election Commission of India (@ECISVEEP) September 23, 2026 In a detailed press note, the ECI said written notes, observations, technical suggestions and internal checks were part of the normal functioning of a multi-member constitutional body. It said such inputs were intended to ensure transparency, legal compliance and operational rigour and did not amount to formal dissent.ECI says differing views normal“Differing views and observations are a normal part of deliberation in any institution,” the Commission said, adding that every officer was authorised to offer suggestions aimed at improving the electoral system.The ECI also maintained that all official orders and administrative directions issued by it carried legal sanction and followed statutory procedures under the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.ECI Rejects 'Rift' Claims Over SIR, Says All Decisions Taken Unanimously After Report Flags 14 ObjectionsResponding to the report's focus on 14 objections, the Commission said highlighting specific internal observations over 10 months while overlooking the “much larger body” of approvals and decisions presented only one side of the picture.Commission says decisions unanimousIt said the Commission had taken numerous decisions, introduced around 40 initiatives and undertaken several electoral reforms, including SIR, during the past year. According to the ECI, all these decisions were outcomes of unanimous decisions of the full Commission.The poll panel also defended its digital platforms, including ECINet, saying they operated under strict data security protocols and audit controls to prevent unauthorised tampering or manipulation. It said Electoral Registration Officers and District Election Officers continued to exercise their statutory powers regarding registration and deletion of names.Report highlights SIR objectionsThe Indian Express report had highlighted objections concerning changes to Form 6, access to electoral-roll databases, appeals during the SIR process in West Bengal and software-related issues affecting voter registration and restoration.Election Commission Expands Gen Alpha, Gen Z Outreach With 50,000 Electoral Literacy Clubs Ahead Of 2029 PollsThe report triggered criticism from Opposition leaders, who questioned the functioning of the poll panel and raised concerns over the SIR exercise. The ECI, however, reiterated that it remained committed to carrying out its constitutional responsibilities with “complete integrity”.

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has rejected reports of an internal rift over the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, asserting that all decisions, including those related to the revision exercise, were taken unanimously with the approval of the Chief Election Commissioner and both Election Commissioners.The clarification came after an investigation by The Indian Express reported that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded at least 14 objections over 10 months to decisions and orders linked to the SIR process.ECI sources said that questions, comments and requests for clarification may have been raised during internal discussions, but maintained that there was no formal dissent against any final decision of the Commission.What Did The Indian Express Report?The Indian Express investigation, published on September 23, said Sandhu and Joshi had raised objections on record at least 14 times, including four instances on a single day. According to the report, the objections concerned decisions that the two Commissioners said had been taken or communicated without their knowledge or approval.The report highlighted four broad areas of concern changes to Form 6 used for new voter registration, access and control over the electoral-roll database, appeals filed during the SIR process in West Bengal, and software-related issues affecting voter registration and restoration.One of the objections concerned changes to Form 6. The report said the form was modified to include a question linking new voter applications to the electoral roll of the previous SIR. Sandhu reportedly described the change as “unauthorised and illegal”, while Joshi had earlier raised concerns about making such a change without an amendment to the relevant rules.The Commissioners also reportedly questioned what the Indian Express described as the gradual centralisation of the electoral-roll database and whether statutory election officials at the state and constituency levels continued to have the required access and authority.Another objection related to appeals in West Bengal. According to the report, Sandhu questioned who had authorised appeals against decisions that restored voters’ names and whether the process had been communicated to the concerned Commissioners.The investigation also cited a Goa case in which software limitations allegedly prevented the restoration of 97 voters who had been found eligible by Electoral Registration Officers.ECI Says No Formal Dissent Over SIRResponding to the report, ECI sources maintained that there was no disagreement over final decisions of the poll panel.The Commission pointed to the procedure under which its business is preferably transacted unanimously, with a majority decision applicable in cases where the members differ. The ECI’s position is that the existence of questions or objections raised during deliberations does not amount to formal dissent over the final decisions taken by the Commission.The clarification is significant because the Indian Express report had portrayed the repeated objections as evidence of sustained internal disquiet within the three-member constitutional body.What Is SIR And Why Has It Drawn Scrutiny?The Special Intensive Revision is an exercise to revise and verify electoral rolls. It began in Bihar in June 2025 and has subsequently been expanded to other states and Union Territories.The exercise has faced scrutiny over the deletion and restoration of names from electoral rolls. The Indian Express reported that more than 13 crore names had been removed from draft rolls across 30 states and Union Territories during the process.The ECI has maintained that the exercise is intended to identify and remove ineligible entries, including names of deceased, shifted or duplicate voters, while ensuring that eligible voters are included in the rolls.The SIR process has also been subject to judicial scrutiny. In West Bengal, for instance, the ECI recently told the Supreme Court that more than 38 lakh appeals had been filed in connection with the revision process, including appeals seeking restoration of deleted names.Delhi SIR: L K Advani, EAM S Jaishankar, Election Commissioner SS Sandhu Get Notices For 'Discrepancies' In Voter Details Opposition Questions ECI, Seeks ActionThe Indian Express report triggered sharp reactions from Opposition parties, with several leaders questioning the functioning of the poll panel and raising concerns about the SIR process.Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav described the reported objections as serious and urged the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognisance of the matter. Congress MP Manish Tewari said that, if the reported facts were correct, they raised questions about the functioning and credibility of the Election Commission.Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh shared the Indian Express report and said party leader Abhishek Singhvi would address the issue in detail. Congress general secretary KC Venugopal also called for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.Trinamool Congress MP Derek O’Brien renewed the Opposition’s demand for action against the CEC, while Shiv Sena UBT MP Sanjay Raut and CPI(M) MP John Brittas also criticised the Commission over the reported objections. RJD MP Manoj Jha questioned the ECI’s functioning and called for the CEC’s resignation.