The Election Commission (EC) on Wednesday said all its official orders, decisions and administrative directions carry full legal sanctions, and differing views and observations are a normal part of deliberation in any institution.
The remarks were made in response to a report by The Indian Express that decisions taken on the contentious Special Intensive Regulation (SIR) process were objected to by two of the three poll commissioners.
In a point-to-point written rebuttal, the poll body said it remains fully committed to executing its constitutional duties with complete integrity, recognising its vital role in advancing Indian democracy.
Also Read | Differing views are normal but decisions unanimous: Election Commission amid row
How the Commission addressed each claim:
Dissent
Deep Dive
What are the main objections raised by Election Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi regarding the Special Intensive Regulation (SIR)?
Why did the Election Commission argue that its decisions regarding voter registration were lawful?
How does the centralisation of the voter database impact the electoral process in India?
Report: It said that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had formally objected at least 14 times over the past 10 months to decisions and orders of the Election Commission.
EC rebuttal: The EC called this “routine exchanges”. "Written notes, observations, technical suggestions and internal checks-and-balances are standard, ongoing practices designed to ensure complete transparency, legal compliance and operational rigour. All actions of ECI have been in accordance with laws and instructions of the Commission," it said.
{{/usCountry}}EC rebuttal: The EC called this “routine exchanges”. "Written notes, observations, technical suggestions and internal checks-and-balances are standard, ongoing practices designed to ensure complete transparency, legal compliance and operational rigour. All actions of ECI have been in accordance with laws and instructions of the Commission," it said.
{{/usCountry}}Also Read | ‘Mastermind, treason, biggest scam’: Opposition attacks Gyanesh Kumar after report claims ECI dissent
On SIR voter additions, deletions
Report: It said the commissioners’ objections included additions, deletion and restoration of voters and changes to the voter registration process.
EC rebuttal: The poll body addressed this in general terms, saying “Statutory authorities, including Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and District Election Officers (DEOs), function as per statutory powers for registration and deletion under law.”
On centralisation of the voter database
Report: According to the report, Sandhu and Joshi warned that voter database access was gradually being centralised in Delhi, bypassing state election officials.
EC rebuttal: The Commission said its digital platforms, including ECINet, “operate under strict data security protocols to prevent unauthorized tampering, manipulation, etc.”
On ‘unauthorized and illegal’ characterisation
Report: The Indian Express said the commissioners called steps on new voters 'unauthorised, illegal'.
EC rebuttal: The EC argued that "all actions of ECI have been in accordance with laws and instructions of the Commission", and that operational queries raised during draft stages were part of normal administrative practice.
Also Read | Election Commission sources reject report of internal disquiet: ‘SIR, all other decisions unanimous’
On changes to Form 6
Report: It said the poll commissioners had also objected to changes in Form 6 used for new voter registrations.
EC rebuttal: The statement does not mention Form 6 or registration procedures directly, but addresses the matter through its broader claim that all decisions were “an outcome of the unanimous decisions of the full Commission.”
On Goa case
Report: The investigation cited a specific case where 97 verified voters in Goa could not be added to the rolls due to software limitations, an example of centralisation problems in practice.
EC rebuttal: The statement did not comment on the matter.