Stories
42 Former Judges Back CEC Gyanesh Kumar and Question Vote Theft Claims
- •Forty-two former judges signed an open letter cautioning against unverified allegations directed at constitutional institutions like the Election Commission.
- •The signatories questioned the repeated use of vote theft claims and defended the legality of the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.
- •The open letter emphasizes the importance of utilizing established democratic and legal mechanisms instead of weakening public faith in the electoral process.
- •The controversy follows intense political debate and reports of internal disagreements among election commissioners regarding the revision exercise.
Key Questions Answered
Forty-two former judges signed an open letter to caution against unsupported allegations, such as vote theft, directed at constitutional institutions. They warned that these repeated attacks can erode public trust and urged political parties to pursue grievances through proper democratic and legal mechanisms.
The former judges and supporting groups defended the Special Intensive Revision, stating it was conducted entirely within the legal framework under Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. The process aims to ensure clean voter rolls by removing duplicate or deceased entries.
The Election Commission rejected claims of an internal split, maintaining that decisions regarding the SIR were unanimous. Meanwhile, multiple petitions have been filed in courts to scrutinize the poll panel's functioning, and a panel led by retired Justice Madan B Lokur was formed to review the validity of the SIR exercise.
