FOR THE BETTER part of 78 years, the Election Commission of India has fulfilled its mandate of defending voting as sacrosanct. However, the past decade has exposed persisting cracks and new challenges.
There is rising distress that the EC’s statutory independence and authority are being compromised, corroding its powers and eroding citizen trust. This threatens not just the institution, but the very sanctity of the electoral system. Nowhere is this crisis more acute than in the lived experience of opposition parties.
This was evident in the Shiv Sena’s split. The EC’s unprecedented decision to allocate the party symbol and name to a breakaway faction represented not just a bureaucratic controversy, but a direct blow to political pluralism and representation. Symbols are not mere logos but the soul, especially for regional and opposition parties. Disputes over names, logos or symbols do not just delay electioneering, they undermine fair political competition and create deep voter confusion. When the EC is perceived as partial, its decisions seem to unfairly target opposition voices. The opacity around such rulings feeds the belief that the state machinery is tilted against challengers to the centre of power.
The instability of the EC’s functioning came into focus when it announced a Special Intensive Revision of Bihar’s rolls just five months before crucial polls. It excluded Aadhaar, voter ID and ration cards as documentation, citing duplicates. Bihar, with a population exceeding 13 crore, saw nearly 65 lakh voters excluded. This was not mere administrative action, but systematic exclusion of millions—a precedent that, if extended, could threaten democracy.
This took another turn after Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi exposed large-scale voter manipulation in Mahadevapura in the 2024 general elections. Using EC rolls, he showed “vote theft” of over one lakh votes through fake addresses, bulk registrations and misuse of Form 6. Instead of addressing these allegations with evidence, the EC asked Rahul to sign an affidavit and declined to release CCTV footage, citing privacy concerns. In Bihar, only after Supreme Court intervention did the EC publish the list of the 65 lakh excluded voters.
Similar concerns arose in Maharashtra, where rolls saw a sudden surge of over 40 lakh names between Lok Sabha and assembly elections, despite 20.7 lakh first-time voters still missing. This cast serious doubt on integrity. The EC’s responses have often been inadequate, defensive and opaque.
Further, the Centre’s unwillingness to allow even a parliamentary debate on the issue undermines transparency and accountability. The makers of our Constitution sought to protect people while preserving their rights and duties as the foundation of federalism. Recent events across states show the contrary.
Reform is now necessary. The timeline for SIR processes must be revisited so due diligence is not sacrificed. Structural checks and transparency are essential to ensure the EC remains immune to political winds. The Centre must not shirk responsibility, for there can be no democracy without a strong opposition, and no opposition without the freedom to retain identity and compete equally.
A robust EC, insulated from interference and answerable to the people, is the only antidote to the erosion of trust. It is not enough to protect the institution on paper; for democracy to flourish, its soul and citizens’ rights must be defended at every turn. Denying even one citizen the right to vote is an indignity to everything the framers of our Constitution held sacred.
The writer is a Shiv Sena (UBT) leader and member of the Rajya Sabha.