India
oi-Swastika Sruti
The Election Commission of India has come under fresh scrutiny after an investigation by The Indian Express revealed that two Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, raised formal objections to several decisions over a period of 10 months.
Between October 2025 and August 2026, Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi raised formal objections over voter registration, data access, and official communications within the Election Commission of India. The ECI stated these internal observations are normal and all final decisions were unanimous.
The objections reportedly covered issues linked to voter registration, deletion and restoration of names, appeals against electoral-roll decisions and access to the Election Commission’s voter-data systems.
The period from October 2025 to August 2026 also saw the Election Commission conduct several major election-related briefings and launch new technology platforms, with all three commissioners continuing to appear together in public.
Here is how the controversy unfolded.
October 2025: SIR Expansion And The First Recorded Objection
The timeline starts from October 27, 2025, when Gyanesh Kumar, the Chief Election Commissioner, declared the second phase of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
This process was applied to 12 states and Union Territories, among which were the election-bound West Bengal, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu. Sandhu and Joshi were present along with Kumar in the press conference.
Assam, on the other hand, was excluded from the phase since the state uses a different criterion for citizenship and revision of electoral rolls.
On October 28, Sandhu had apparently objected to the communications/orders issued in the name of the Election Commission without the sanction of the entire committee.
The order in question was not specified in the investigation.
November 2025: Concern Over Access To ERONet
The next major issue involved ERONet, the system used by election officials to manage electoral-roll data.
On November 4, Deputy Election Commissioner Sanjay Kumar reportedly flagged restrictions on the access available to Electoral Registration Officers.
ERONet had traditionally allowed officials at the state and constituency levels to add, remove or restore voter names.
The concern came at a time when the Election Commission was preparing to introduce a new digital platform that would bring several election-related services together.
January 2026: New Election Technology Takes Centre Stage
Issues of access to electoral-roll systems carried forward into the new year.
According to reports, on January 2, Sanjay Kumar, Deputy Election Commissioner, wrote to the IT division of the Election Commission reiterating that no technological developments should affect the statutory duties of the Electoral Registration Officer.
And then came the launch of ECINet in New Delhi on January 22.
This was done by Gyanesh Kumar, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi collectively.
They all launched ECINet at the International Conference on Democracy and Election Management.
At the same time, all three signed the Delhi Declaration, emphasizing the issues of electoral rolls, election management, and technology.
As for the Election Commission, it continued to operate as a collective body.
February 2026: All Three Commissioners Appear In Assam
On February 18, the three commissioners jointly addressed the media in Guwahati during preparations for the Assam Assembly election.
The briefing followed meetings with political parties in the state.
Gyanesh Kumar spoke about the completion of the electoral-roll revision exercise in Assam. There was no public indication of the internal disagreements that had already begun to emerge.
March 2026: West Bengal Brings Electoral Rolls Into Focus
The Commission’s next major public appearance came in Kolkata on March 10.
The briefing took place amid a controversy over the West Bengal electoral roll, after more than 60 lakh names were flagged during the revision process.
Gyanesh Kumar said the Commission was committed to maintaining the integrity of the voter list and assured that eligible voters would not be excluded.
Later, however, questions were raised internally over appeals concerning voters in the state.
According to The Indian Express, Sandhu subsequently questioned who had authorised certain appeals filed in the name of the Election Commission.
March 15: Assembly Election Schedule Announced
Just five days later, the three commissioners appeared together again.
On March 15, the Commission announced the schedule for Assembly elections in Assam, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Puducherry.
Once again, the public briefing showed all three commissioners together despite the internal objections reported later.
April 2026: Dispute Over Official Communications
The reported differences extended beyond electoral rolls.
On April 16, Sandhu reportedly raised concerns over communications being issued in the name of the Election Commission without approval from the full panel.
A similar concern was reportedly raised by Joshi on April 24.
The issue centred on whether communications carrying the authority of the Election Commission had received the required approval from all members.
May 2026: Form 6 Becomes A Major Point Of Disagreement
One of the most important reported disagreements came over Form 6, which citizens use to apply for inclusion in the electoral roll. According to the Indian Express investigation, Sandhu and Joshi objected on May 15 to changes being made to the form in connection with the SIR exercise.
Joshi reportedly questioned whether the form could be altered without first changing the relevant rules.
The dispute was significant because Form 6 is directly linked to the process through which new voters enter the electoral system.
May 25: Last Joint Public Appearance
On May 25, the three commissioners appeared together at a workshop in Delhi on Risk Management and Electoral Resilience.
This became their last reported joint public appearance during the period examined by the investigation.
Behind the scenes, however, disagreements over electoral-roll management and the Election Commission’s technology systems continued.
May-August 2026: Concerns Over Centralised Voter Data
During the following months, the focus increasingly shifted to the structure of the Election Commission’s digital systems. Sandhu and Joshi reportedly raised concerns about the growing centralisation of electoral-roll data.
Questions were also raised about whether state-level Electoral Registration Officers retained sufficient access to perform their legal responsibilities.
The issue was significant because changes to voter records are normally handled through designated electoral officials.
The reported objections sought greater clarity over who could access and modify the database.
August 2026: Fresh Questions Over Form 6 And Bengal Appeals
The disagreement over voter registration continued into August.
According to the Indian Express investigation, Sandhu objected on August 13 to an additional question added to Form 6 that was connected with an earlier electoral roll.
He reportedly described the change as unauthorised and questioned its legal basis.
Another issue concerned appeals related to voters in West Bengal.
Sandhu reportedly asked who had authorised the filing of certain appeals in the name of the Election Commission and sought clarity over the decision-making process behind them.
September 2026: Internal Objections Become Public
The controversy entered a new phase in September, when the Indian Express published its investigation detailing the internal objections.
According to the report, Sandhu and Joshi had raised objections at least 14 times during the 10-month period.
The concerns covered four broad areas:
- Addition of new voters
- Deletion and restoration of names
- Appeals concerning electoral-roll decisions
- Access to and control over voter-data technology
The report brought the internal functioning of the three-member Commission into the public spotlight.
September 9: Commissioners Meet After A Gap
According to the investigation, the three commissioners held a full meeting on September 9, after a gap of around four months.
The meeting came against the backdrop of continuing differences over SIR, electoral rolls and the Commission’s technology systems.
The timing became significant as the details of the internal objections emerged publicly later in the month.
Election Commission Responds
The Election Commission has not denied the existence of the notes highlighted in the investigation. However, it has disputed the interpretation that they demonstrate a breakdown or division within the Commission.
The ECI said internal observations and disagreements are part of the decision-making process and maintained that its final decisions over the past 10 months were unanimous.
The Commission also said that focusing on a limited number of internal notes without considering the larger number of approvals, decisions and initiatives presented only part of the picture.
The response was signed by Gyanesh Kumar, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
