New Delhi, Aug 8 (NationPress) Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha and a Congress MP, faces significant backlash for his recent reiteration of allegations regarding flaws in India's electoral rolls. These accusations, as per sources from the Election Commission of India (ECI), mirror claims that have already been dismissed and ignore established legal protocols.

During a recent press briefing, Gandhi asserted that the presence of multiple entries and duplications within the voter list jeopardizes the integrity of the electoral system. However, ECI officials have labeled these statements as a mere repetition of similar allegations made in 2018 by Kamal Nath, the former president of the Madhya Pradesh Congress Committee, which were ultimately rejected by the Supreme Court.

Sources indicate that the Supreme Court's ruling in the Kamal Nath case had already addressed the validity of machine-readable electoral documents and confirmed the reliability of the ECI’s voter databases.

Officials commented, “Gandhi’s insistence on bringing up these issues now either shows a lack of understanding of the law or a calculated effort to erode public confidence.”

In 2018, Kamal Nath had approached the Supreme Court alleging that the electoral rolls in Madhya Pradesh contained multiple listings of the same individuals, sometimes appearing as many as 36 times, based on data from a private website. The Supreme Court found no merit in his claims, especially after the ECI provided evidence that any discrepancies had been corrected months prior to Nath's petition. The court declined to grant his requests, which included a demand for searchable PDF formats of the electoral rolls.

Importantly, the Congress party had received the updated voter list ahead of time, further undermining their allegations. This situation established a clear precedent for how such concerns should be handled.

In his latest comments, Rahul Gandhi claimed that similar issues persist, citing an example of a voter named Aditya Srivastava, allegedly registered in three different state rolls. However, ECI sources firmly stated that this error had been rectified months ago, and the updated lists were made public.

These recent allegations seem more aimed at creating political stir than addressing substantive legal issues, particularly given that the standard processes for objecting to and rectifying electoral rolls are well-known and accessible.

ECI sources highlighted that Gandhi's ongoing criticism of the ECI, without providing any new evidence or adhering to the established legal framework, reflects poorly on his respect for the judiciary.

“This isn’t about electoral reform,” sources remarked. “It's about political maneuvering in defiance of settled legal standards.”

The law outlines a clear mechanism for contesting entries in electoral rolls and for appealing decisions. Instead of utilizing these channels, Gandhi has opted to sensationalize the issue through media channels, according to ECI sources.

Election commission officials emphasized a critical legal principle: when the law specifies a method for conducting actions, it must be followed. Ignoring due process not only undermines the ECI but also threatens the rule of law.

Given the unfounded nature of the allegations, the ECI has urged Gandhi to either formally assert and legally pursue his claims or publicly apologize for defaming the organization.

“If Rahul Gandhi genuinely believes in the accuracy of his claims, he should sign a formal declaration under oath and pursue his case through legal channels,” stated ECI. “Otherwise, he owes the nation an apology for voicing baseless accusations against a constitutional body.”