Developing a consensus on electoral reforms should not be an insurmountable task if all stakeholders demonstrate a genuine willingness to resolve contentious issues.
The integrity of a constitutional institution such as the Election Commission (EC) cannot be restored through confrontation or mutual recrimination. What is needed instead is an open and constructive dialogue involving all political parties and relevant non-political stakeholders. Failure to address the present crisis through consensus could allow it to snowball into a much larger controversy, undermining public confidence in the electoral process—the very foundation of India’s democracy. Such a dialogue must go beyond the question of the continuation or removal of any individual. Its primary objective should be to evolve a comprehensive framework that ensures free, fair, transparent and credible elections.
Developing a consensus on electoral reforms should not be an insurmountable task if all stakeholders demonstrate a genuine willingness to resolve contentious issues. A permanent and uniformly applicable set of standard operating procedures (SOPs), adopted through broad-based consensus, could provide a durable solution and prevent electoral rules from being altered arbitrarily in the future. For instance, Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls should be conducted at predetermined intervals, preferably in coordination with the national census. Equally important is the need for clear and uniform guidelines specifying the documents required for retaining existing entries or including new voters on the electoral rolls. The prescribed documents must be easily accessible to ordinary citizens so that procedural requirements do not become barriers to the exercise of their democratic rights.
The process of electoral roll revision must also incorporate adequate safeguards against the arbitrary exclusion or harassment of genuine voters. Minor discrepancies, such as spelling errors or variations in names, should not become grounds for questioning a citizen’s eligibility without proper verification. While the Election Commission has introduced certain changes concerning Forms 6 and 7, further reforms are necessary to prevent the misuse of the objection mechanism. Under the revised guidelines, an individual can reportedly submit up to ten Form 7 applications to challenge entries on the electoral rolls. This limit should be reconsidered, and every objection should be supported by credible grounds. More importantly, the responsibility for substantiating an allegation should rest with the complainant, and no voter should face exclusion merely because an objection has been filed. At the same time, genuine complaints must be investigated through a transparent process.
Electoral reform, however, cannot be confined to the revision of voter lists alone. The institutional independence of the Election Commission is equally crucial. The changes introduced in 2023 concerning the appointment and protection of Election Commissioners have raised important questions about the safeguards necessary to preserve the Commission’s autonomy and public credibility. These provisions, too, deserve a thorough and impartial review, with the objective of ensuring that the institution remains insulated from partisan influence and commands the confidence of all political stakeholders.
Ultimately, the credibility of an election depends not merely on the conduct of polling but also on the fairness of the rules, the transparency of their implementation and the independence of the institution responsible for enforcing them. Protecting the integrity of India’s electoral system is a collective democratic responsibility, and no political interest should be allowed to outweigh that larger national imperative.