Opposition moves to Impeach the ECI

Election Commission of India: A Million Blames, a Bizarre Press Conference, and the Shadow of Impeachment

The Election Commission of India (ECI), once regarded as one of the country’s most robust and independent constitutional institutions, now finds itself mired in controversy. What began as a dispute over voter roll discrepancies in Bihar has spiralled into a full-blown institutional crisis, with the Opposition INDIA bloc reportedly preparing an impeachment motion against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar.

At the heart of the row lies the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. Opposition leaders claim that as many as 65 lakh voters have been excluded from the draft list, a figure the Supreme Court has already flagged, directing the ECI to make public a comprehensive, searchable record of those omissions. Instead of clarity and transparency, the Commission’s press conference on Sunday produced little more than defensiveness, accusations, and veiled threats.

The political confrontation between the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the Opposition bloc reached a new flashpoint on Monday, 18 August 2025, as the INDIA coalition signalled its intention to move an impeachment motion against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. According to sources, the decision was taken during a meeting of the bloc’s floor leaders, who expressed deep dissatisfaction over the conduct of the poll body in recent weeks. The move comes directly on the heels of an extraordinary press conference held by the CEC in New Delhi on Sunday. The press interaction, intended to allay concerns, only fuelled sharper criticism, with the Commission accused of shielding the ruling party while dismissing allegations of large-scale “voter theft” raised by Congress and other Opposition parties.

Legal framework for removal

The path to impeach a Chief Election Commissioner is deliberately arduous, reflecting the constitutional intent to preserve the independence of the institution. Under the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, the CEC may be removed only through a process equivalent to that of a Supreme Court judge. This requires a motion to be passed in both Houses of Parliament with a two-thirds majority, following signatures from at least 50 members to initiate proceedings. Given the numerical realities of the current Parliament, the Opposition is unlikely to muster the requisite votes. Yet, as one senior INDIA bloc leader explained, the exercise is “less about arithmetic and more about principle”—a symbolic assertion that the Commission’s neutrality has been fatally compromised.

A protest wrapped in procedure

For the Opposition, pressing ahead with an impeachment motion serves two parallel purposes. Firstly, it creates a parliamentary record of their objection to what they describe as “blatant partisanship” and a “dereliction of constitutional duty.” Secondly, it shifts the debate into the public domain, drawing attention to the ECI’s perceived erosion of credibility at a time when free and fair elections are under intense scrutiny. The timing of the move is equally significant. By challenging the CEC immediately after his controversial press conference, the INDIA bloc is attempting to frame the Commission’s public messaging as further evidence of bias. What was meant to be a display of transparency by Gyanesh Kumar has, in the Opposition’s reading, become proof of a combative and politically aligned institution.

A clash of perception and credibility

The core dispute centres around the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, where the Opposition has alleged that nearly 6.5 million voters were left out of the draft lists. The Supreme Court has already directed that the names of these excluded voters be published in a searchable format, a mandate the Commission has so far not complied with in full. Instead, critics argue, the CEC has responded with defensiveness, accusations of “misinformation,” and what Congress leaders described as “veiled threats.”

While the impeachment motion itself may not alter the CEC’s tenure, it sets the stage for a bruising political contest. The coming days will reveal whether the Opposition’s gambit will succeed in rallying public opinion or if the government, bolstered by numbers, will simply brush aside the symbolic challenge. What is clear, however, is that the Election Commission—once regarded as a model of institutional integrity—finds itself embroiled in perhaps its most turbulent credibility crisis in decades.

A Press Conference that Deepened Distrust

If the ECI’s intention was to restore public confidence, its press conference achieved the opposite. Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar began by asserting that the Commission makes “no distinction between ruling party and Opposition.” The problem, however, was not his declaration but his refusal to answer the substantive questions raised by Rahul Gandhi and other Opposition leaders.

The Congress, through its senior functionaries, accused Kumar of sidestepping accountability. K. C. Venugopal dismissed the event as a display of “hollow claims of neutrality,” noting that instead of offering clarity, the CEC seemed intent on issuing thinly veiled warnings to critics. Jairam Ramesh went further, calling Kumar’s opening remarks “laughable,” pointing out that Gandhi’s queries were based entirely on the Commission’s own published data. The mood across the Opposition spectrum was scathing. RJD’s Manoj Jha compared the press meet to a partisan briefing rather than the communication of a neutral constitutional umpire. Trinamool Congress’s Derek O’Brien accused the Commission of functioning as the BJP’s “branch office.” CPI(M)’s M. A. Baby described the spectacle as “combative deflection” that mirrored the ruling party’s rhetoric, while the CPI’s Binoy Viswam simply said the Commission had “miserably failed” to answer even a single crucial question. Instead of reassurance, the ECI’s conduct has only solidified the perception that it is drifting towards partisanship. In the words of one Opposition leader, the press conference will be remembered less as an exercise in transparency and more as an illustration of how not to defend an institution’s integrity.

An Institution Under Siege

This confrontation raises fundamental questions about the independence of the ECI. Since its inception, the Commission has been entrusted with safeguarding the sanctity of India’s democratic process - ensuring that elections are free, fair, and above suspicion. It has weathered crises in the past, often emerging stronger. But the current episode is different. The alleged disenfranchisement of 65 lakh voters in Bihar is not a minor clerical error. It strikes at the heart of democratic legitimacy. Voter rolls are the foundation of electoral fairness; their manipulation or mishandling erodes trust not only in the Commission but in the very process of elections.

Moreover, the Supreme Court’s intervention has added another layer of urgency. By directing the ECI to publish the names of those excluded, the judiciary has effectively signalled that it does not fully trust the Commission to act with transparency on its own. For the CEC to respond with accusations of “misinformation” and hostility towards critics only reinforces this perception of erosion.

The Risk of Democratic Erosion

The stakes here extend beyond one man or one institution. If the Election Commission loses credibility, India risks undermining the very bedrock of its electoral democracy. A general perception that the Commission is partial or pliant would taint every future election with suspicion. The Opposition’s charge - that the ECI is morphing into a “combative, politically motivated body” - is not merely rhetorical. If such an impression consolidates in the public mind, it could trigger a crisis of legitimacy at the national level. For the ruling BJP, too, there are risks. While short-term control over institutions may appear advantageous, the long-term consequence could be the hollowing out of public faith in elections themselves. In a country as vast and diverse as India, once that faith is lost, it cannot be easily restored.

The Election Commission of India now stands at a crossroads. It can either reaffirm its independence by fully complying with the Supreme Court’s directions and engaging transparently with critics, or it can continue on a path of defensiveness and political posturing. The former could help restore trust; the latter risks pushing it towards irrelevance - or even impeachment. In the end, the credibility of elections is not a partisan luxury but a democratic necessity. By turning a serious institutional query into a combative press spectacle, the Commission has done itself no favours. Unless it course-corrects swiftly, the institution once hailed as the guardian of Indian democracy may soon be remembered as its greatest casualty.

With inputs from agencies

Image Source: Multiple agencies