Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) President M.K. Stalin on Wednesday, 23 September demanded the immediate removal of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, alleging that two fellow Election Commissioners had objected to decisions taken without their knowledge or approval on 14 separate occasions over 10 months. The demand, made via a statement on social media, also called for a halt to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and an impartial inquiry into the Election Commission of India (ECI)'s conduct.

The Core Allegations

Stalin alleged that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had raised objections on 14 occasions over 10 months, reportedly covering decisions on adding and deleting voters and the operation of software used to manage electoral rolls. He questioned how decisions could have been lawfully taken if two of the three Election Commissioners were allegedly unaware of them.

The DMK president also raised concerns about Electoral Registration Officers (EROs), who are legally responsible for updating voter lists. He alleged that restrictions embedded in the electoral roll software had prevented EROs from exercising their statutory powers, including adding eligible voters in certain cases.

SIR and West Bengal Concerns

Stalin claimed that SIR exercises conducted shortly before elections had led to serious irregularities, particularly in West Bengal. He argued that the disclosures raised broader questions about Assembly election results conducted following such revisions. The DMK and other opposition parties had previously opposed the large-scale deletion of names from voter lists, he noted.

He further asked who had authorised appeals against court-directed inclusion of voters and why the other Election Commissioners had allegedly not been informed of such decisions — questions he said warranted an investigation into possible political interference.

What the Commission Rules Require

Under the three-member structure of the Election Commission of India, matters are required to be decided unanimously wherever possible and by majority opinion when members disagree. Critics argue that the alleged pattern of unilateral decisions, if substantiated, would represent a structural breakdown in that process, damaging public confidence in the institution's independence and transparency.

Opposition's Renewed Demand

Stalin noted that opposition parties, including the DMK, had earlier submitted a formal notice seeking Gyanesh Kumar's removal. Renewing that demand, he urged the relevant authorities to remove the CEC immediately, suspend the SIR process, and initiate an independent probe into decisions taken within the Commission. The Election Commission of India had not publicly responded to the allegations at the time of this report.

The controversy arrives at a politically sensitive juncture, with several state elections on the horizon and opposition scrutiny of the ECI's functioning at an elevated pitch.