DC Edit | All Charges Against CEC Must Be Closely Studied

The motion the Opposition parties have given seeking the removal of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar from his post may meet with expected disapproval by Parliament given the numbers but the allegations contained in it have to be discussed in detail, not only by parliamentarians but also by all those who think they have a stake in the success of democracy in the country.

The Opposition charges Mr Kumar with mass disenfranchisement of voters through the Special Intensive Revision of the electoral roll “in alignment with the ruling party’s political objectives” and acting under the thumb of the executive and failing to uphold the independence of the institution, the impropriety in his press conference on August 17, 2025, allegedly targeting Leader of the Opposition (LoP) Rahul Gandhi, “discriminatory treatment” of Opposition and ruling party members, “obstruction” of investigations and the refusal to provide ‘transparency tools’.” They have raised questions about his appointment, too. These charges have been presented as the grounds of “proved misbehaviour” for the removal of the CEC.

The way the SIR is being rolled out in West Bengal after its problematic execution in several other states militates against the very concept of universal adult franchise, a hallmark of a functional democracy. It may be remembered that this feature did not exist in many countries when they started their journey as a democracy; it was added midway. India, on the other hand, considered it a fundamental right not only of the citizen but also of the state, for the citizen’s participation gives the state and its organs the legitimacy which other forms of government cannot claim, and hence it was an integral part of the republic.

The lakhs of people now running from pillar to post in West Bengal to prove that they are legitimate voters in the country and have a right to vote as they have been doing in the previous elections are a sight a meaningful democracy cannot ignore. An election without a proper electoral roll is an affront to the very idea of electoral democracy, and the office that presides over it must be made to answer for it. The charge that the SIR process is “in direct alignment with the Union home minister's stated position that an NRC (National Register of Citizens) exercise would be conducted across India” and that he “has converted the EC from an impartial election conducting institution into a citizenship determination tribunal” needs to be discussed by every citizen. The threat of disenfranchisement is limited not just to West Bengal.

Mr Kumar’s public ultimatum to Mr Gandhi who raised alarming questions on vote theft in Karnataka to apologise for his allegations was not the desirable manner to respond to the leader of the Opposition, or for that matter, any citizen of this country. Instead of coming up with facts to disprove the allegations, it resorted to issuing threats, however empty they are. It only showed the sticky wicket the EC is standing on.

Democracy is all about transparency. Its institutions must be brought under public scrutiny, and Parliament is one of the most efficient platforms to carry it out. The discussion on the motion must throw some light on the functioning of the key institution and help it understand its failings and make the necessary amendments.