New Delhi, Sep 23 Congress MP Shashi Tharoor on Wednesday said the Election Commission’s (EC) statement, after it emerged that the two election commissioners repeatedly dissented over the SIR of voter lists, does not appear to answer several of the specific questions raised.
Tharoor said given the importance of electoral institutions, the questions raised are worth being placed on public record and answered transparently.
His remarks came after an Indian Express report that said election commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had objected on record at least 14 times over the last 10 months to decisions and orders they said were issued without their knowledge, even as the national rollout of the SIR was under the supervision of the full commission.
Their objections covered the manner in which the statutory voter registration Form 6 was amended, the handling of additions and deletions from voter lists, and centralised control over the electoral roll database, according to the report
Under fire over the red flags raised by two of its commissioners over the SIR process, the EC asserted on Wednesday that differing views and observations are a normal part of deliberations in any institution and all its orders carry full legal sanction and follow established statutory procedures.
In a statement, the poll panel also said that not only the three commissioners, but every officer of the EC is fully authorised to give his suggestions to the commission for improving the electoral system.
Reacting to the EC’s statement, Tharoor said, “So the ECI has now responded to the @IndianExpress investigation by saying that internal observations are a normal part of deliberation, that its decisions follow the law, that its digital systems have security controls, and that the Commission’s decisions over the past year were unanimous.”
“However, the press note (attached) does not appear to answer several of the specific questions raised in the investigation,” the MP from Thiruvananthapuram added.
In particular, Tharoor asked were the reported 14 objections actually recorded and what was the disposition of each.
What was the specific legal basis for the changes to Form 6, particularly after objections were recorded by the commissioners, he further asked.
“What happened to the concerns regarding centralisation of electoral-roll database access and IT control? What is the ECI’s explanation for the reported Goa case involving 97 voters?” Tharoor asked.
Who authorised the appeals against the voters whose inclusion was restored, he asked.
“What were the circumstances behind the reported communications to the Cabinet Secretary? Were any communications issued in the name of the Commission without the requisite approval, as reported?” the Congress leader asked.
The distinction seems important — saying that final decisions were unanimous does not, by itself, explain what happened to objections raised during the decision-making process, he argued.
“It may therefore be useful for @ECISVEEP to provide a point-by-point, documentary clarification on these matters rather than treating the general press note as a complete response to the investigation,” Tharoor said.
Earlier, the EC said any operational queries or inputs raised by commission members during draft stages are part of standard administrative practice aimed at safeguarding voter rights and that the suggestions given by the commissioners were for further improving the electoral processes.
The poll body’s statement came after The Indian Express reported that Sandhu and Joshi had red flagged multiple issues, including deletion of names, in various states during the pan-India Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists, triggering a massive political storm.
“All official orders, decisions and administrative directions issued by the Commission carry full legal sanctions and follow established statutory procedures under the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.
“Differing views and observations are a normal part of deliberation in any institution. They are a part of the decision-making process before a final decision is taken. Not only the three Commissioners, but every officer of the Commission is fully authorised to give his suggestions to the Commission for improving the electoral system,” the statement said.
(PTI News)
