Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar has come under scrutiny over decisions reportedly taken during the ongoing electoral process. A petition before the Supreme Court has challenged decisions, guidelines and software changes allegedly made without the consent of the other two Election Commissioners. It contends that such actions violate statutory provisions requiring collective decision-making. The petition has also sought criminal proceedings against the CEC and other officials over alleged dereliction of duty. It further claims that changes were made to election software to seek details of ancestors and information from the previous Special Intensive Revision (SIR), without following the required statutory procedure. The two Election Commissioners are stated to have objected to these changes. These developments have raised questions about transparency, institutional accountability and collective responsibility within the Election Commission. The credibility of this constitutional institution depends on public confidence in its functioning. T N Seshan had earlier brought greater discipline to the electoral process and emphasised adherence to rules. The present concerns should similarly be addressed through clear, transparent and legally prescribed procedures.
DATTAPRASAD SHIRODKAR, Mumbai
