1 hr ago
Newspapers Highlight Election Panel Dispute Over SIR Decisions
The Indian Express reported that two election commissioners questioned some decisions about updating voter lists.
They reportedly raised objections 14 times over 10 months.
The issues included registering voters, changing a voter-registration form and handling voter information.
The Election Commission said such questions are normal when officials discuss draft decisions.
Opposition parties said the report showed a serious problem and called for Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar to be removed.
They also sought an investigation supervised by the Supreme Court.
Newspapers covered the story in different ways, with some focusing on the court case about how election commissioners are appointed.
Several newspapers also published editorials demanding explanations from Kumar.
The Indian Express reported that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi objected 14 times in 10 months to decisions linked to the special intensive revision of electoral rolls.
The objections reportedly concerned new voter registration, Form 6 changes, West Bengal voter appeals, Goa voter data and access to the digital electoral-roll database.
The Election Commission said internal queries and differing views were normal parts of administrative decision-making before final decisions were reached.
Several newspapers linked the controversy to the Supreme Court’s referral of challenges to the 2023 law governing election commissioner appointments to a larger bench.
The Opposition demanded Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar’s removal and a Supreme Court-monitored investigation, while editorials in several newspapers called for answers or his resignation.
- Who
- Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, the Election Commission, the Opposition and Indian newspapers.
- What
- Newspapers reported on objections by two election commissioners to decisions concerning the special intensive revision of electoral rolls, along with related political and legal developments.
- Where
- The dispute concerned electoral-roll decisions involving West Bengal, Goa and other matters in India; the coverage appeared in Indian newspapers.
- When
- The newspaper coverage appeared on September 24, 2026, after The Indian Express published its investigation on September 23.
- Why
- The report prompted demands for Kumar’s removal and an investigation, while the Election Commission defended internal disagreements as part of its normal decision-making process.
Opposition and Critical Coverage
Election Commission’s Defence
Meaning of the objections
Opposition and Critical Coverage
The Opposition and critical newspaper editorials portrayed the objections as evidence of serious internal disagreement and alleged improper conduct by the Chief Election Commissioner.
Election Commission’s Defence
The Election Commission said the cited notes represented operational queries and inputs raised during draft stages, not necessarily final disagreements.
Response to the report
Opposition and Critical Coverage
The Opposition demanded Kumar’s removal, a Supreme Court-monitored investigation and, according to reports, planned a fresh impeachment motion.
Election Commission’s Defence
The commission said focusing on selected internal notes over 10 months ignored the broader body of approvals, decisions, instructions and initiatives.
Public accountability
Opposition and Critical Coverage
The Indian Express, The Hindu and the Hindustan Times called for answers, with The Hindu editorially saying Kumar should resign.
Election Commission’s Defence
The commission maintained that differing views are a normal part of institutional deliberation before consensus and final decisions.
Key facts
- Reported objections
- Sandhu and Joshi reportedly objected 14 times in 10 months to decisions related to the SIR.
- Reported issues
- The objections involved new-voter registration, Form 6 changes, West Bengal voter appeals, Goa voter data and access to the digital electoral-roll database.
- Election Commission response
- The commission said operational queries and differing views during draft stages were normal administrative practice.
- Opposition demand
- The Opposition called for Gyanesh Kumar’s removal and a Supreme Court-monitored investigation.
- Supreme Court case
- The court referred challenges to the constitutional validity of the 2023 Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Appointment Act to a larger bench.
- Appointment panel
- The law provides for appointments based on recommendations from the prime minister, a Union Cabinet minister and the Lok Sabha Opposition leader.
- Editorial coverage
- The Indian Express, The Hindu and the Hindustan Times published editorials demanding answers from Kumar; The Hindu called for his resignation.
Quotes
Election Commission of India
India’s constitutional body responsible for administering elections
“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.”
scroll.in
Sources
Related news
Two Election Commissioners Raise 14 Objections Over SIR Decisions
Election Commission Says SIR Decisions Were Unanimous Despite Objections
Election Commission Says SIR Decisions Were Unanimous After Rift Report
Opposition Demands CEC Gyanesh Kumar’s Removal Over SIR Dissent
Election Commission Calls SIR Decisions Unanimous Despite Internal Objections
Election Commission Dispute Reignites Major Vote Chori Controversy
Essential Steps After Buying Your Dream Home
Uttarakhand CM Dhami Wins Online Poll as Best-Performing CM
