Election Commission of India (ECI) Affidavit in SC on Special Intensive Revision (SIR) Process Raises Transparency Concerns
How much it matters for each exam
- UPSC8/10
- BPSC7/10
- UPPSC7/10
1At a glance
The Election Commission of India (ECI) filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court defending its functioning during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, but it left key questions unanswered regarding internal dissent and transparency. This highlights critical issues about the erosion of checks and balances within the constitutional body, which is vital for safeguarding free and fair elections. Aspirants must understand the institutional challenges to the ECI's autonomy and the role of Article 324.
SC Affidavit Filed
The ECI filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court defending its actions during the SIR but left critical questions on transparency unanswered.
Internal Dissent
Election Commissioners Joshi and Sandhu recorded 14 objections in 10 months, often against decisions taken without consulting them.
SIR Hurdles
The SIR process faces issues like software blocking EROs from reversing deletions and mandatory Aadhaar authentication creating obstacles.
2Facts to remember
Tap a card to see the answer. Try to recall it first.
3Detailed analysis
Context / Background
The Election Commission of India, a constitutional body under Article 324, is mandated to ensure free and fair elections. The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls is a periodic process to clean the voter list. Recent investigations highlighted concerns about the ECI's internal functioning becoming a 'one-man show' under CEC Gyanesh Kumar, eroding its multi-member consultative character.
Core Analysis & Implications
The ECI's affidavit to the Supreme Court is a defensive document that fails to provide full transparency. It acknowledges 14 objections from two Election Commissioners but glosses over the fact that these were often about fait accompli decisions. This indicates a weakening of internal checks. Furthermore, operational glitches in the SIR, like software blocking EROs and mandatory Aadhaar, disenfranchise voters and undermine the ECI's credibility, which is foundational to democratic legitimacy.
Future Outlook / Way Forward
The Supreme Court, with its history of upholding Article 324, is expected to push the ECI towards a 'course correction'. This would require greater transparency, adherence to due process internally and externally, and addressing technical hurdles in the SIR. The ECI must re-establish itself as an institution that listens to stakeholders and prioritizes the fundamental right to vote over procedural rigidity.
4Background GK
Textbook concepts you need to understand this news
- Article 324
- Article 324 of the Indian Constitution establishes the Election Commission, vesting it with the superintendence, direction, and control of elections to Parliament, State Legislatures, and the offices of President and Vice-President.
- Election Commission of India
- A permanent, independent constitutional body responsible for administering election processes in India. It currently consists of a Chief Election Commissioner and two Election Commissioners.
- Electoral Roll
- The official list of eligible voters in a constituency. It is revised periodically under the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
- Electoral Registration Officer (ERO)
- A government officer appointed for each constituency to prepare and revise the electoral roll under the supervision of the Chief Electoral Officer of the state.
5How exams will ask this
- Legal Point: Article 324 of the Constitution
- Nodal Body: Election Commission of India (ECI)
- Data: 14 objections by ECs Joshi & Sandhu in 10 months
Don't make this mistake!
Trap: Confusing the roles within the ECI. An option may ask who is the 'head' of the ECI – the correct answer is the Chief Election Commissioner, but the President appoints all members. Another trap is mixing up SIR (Special Intensive Revision) with the annual summary revision of electoral rolls.
Write these in mains answers
Credibility deficit, Institutional autonomy, Erosion of internal checks, Due process, Democratic compact
6Practice questions
Pick an answer, then read the explanation.
- Q1Easy
The Election Commission of India (ECI) derives its constitutional authority from which Article?
Explanation: Article 324 of the Indian Constitution establishes the Election Commission and vests in it the superintendence, direction, and control of elections. Articles 352, 356, and 368 relate to national emergency, President's Rule, and amendment of the Constitution respectively.
- Q2Hard
Consider the following statements regarding the news about the Election Commission of India's affidavit:
- 1.The affidavit was filed in response to a petition concerning the functioning during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
- 2.The affidavit fully acknowledged and rectified the mistake of making controversial changes to Form 6 for first-time voters.
- 3.Election Commissioners Vivek Joshi and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu recorded a total of 14 objections over a period of 10 months.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct as per the article. Statement 2 is incorrect because the article states the ECI rolled back the changes to Form 6 but did so 'without acknowledging the mistake'. Statement 3 is correct as mentioned directly in the article. Hence, both 1 and 3 are correct.
- Q3Medium
According to the news article, how many objections were recorded by Election Commissioners Vivek Joshi and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu over a span of 10 months?
Explanation: The article explicitly states: 'The objections recorded by the two ECs, Vivek Joshi and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, 14 in 10 months, were part of the consultative process...' This is a direct factual recall from the provided content.
- Q4Medium
What is the primary institutional concern highlighted by the ECI's affidavit and the surrounding controversy, as discussed in the article?
Explanation: The core concern of the article is the perceived weakening of the ECI's multi-member consultative structure, turning it into a 'one-man show', and the lack of transparency in its decision-making process during the SIR. The affidavit's silences on key questions underscore this institutional issue.
7All sources
Original28 October 2026 · Read story