The opposition has renewed its push to impeach Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, citing alleged bias in the voter list revision process. A notice for his removal remains pending in the Rajya Sabha since April 24, 2026, signed by 73 members. The move follows fresh allegations of partisan conduct and large-scale voter name removals during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) drive.
Allegations of Bias and Voter List Manipulation
The opposition accuses Kumar of partisan and discriminatory actions in handling the SIR process. They claim his office has overseen the removal of large numbers of voter names without proper cause. Additionally, they point to irregularities in implementing the model code of conduct during elections. The opposition also notes a failure to act on documentary complaints submitted by various parties and activists.
Two other election commissioners, Sukhbir Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, have recorded written objections 14 times over the past 10 months regarding commission decisions linked to SIR. Their dissent highlights internal disagreements over the voter list update exercise. The opposition argues this shows a pattern of unilateral decision-making by the CEC.
Opposition Leaders Demand Action
Prominent opposition figures have united in demanding Kumar’s removal or resignation. Congress leader Jairam Ramesh stressed that the April 24, 2026 notice remains active and has not been dismissed. CPI(M) parliamentarian John Britas called for an immediate start to the removal process. SP chief Akhilesh Yadav labeled the situation a grave threat to democracy.
AAP convenor Arvind Kejriwal accused Kumar of running the election commission alone, calling for instant cancellation of the SIR exercise. Rahul Gandhi went further, alleging that those responsible for the controversy have committed treason against the nation. These statements reflect growing pressure on the election body amid heightened political tensions.
Election Commission’s Defense and Legal Challenges
The Election Commission has defended its actions, stating all internal decisions are made unanimously. It maintains that differences of opinion among commissioners do not constitute conflict or bias. The Supreme Court has referred petitions challenging the validity of the Election Commissioners (Appointment, Service Conditions and Term of Office) Act, 2023 to a Constitution Bench. This legal development adds another layer to the ongoing controversy.
