New Delhi: Amid the growing demand for the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, 42 former judges have come out in defence of the Election Commission of India (ECI), calling the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls a lawful exercise.
In an open letter, former judges of the Supreme Court, ex-chief justices and judges of various high courts expressed concern over what they described as a sustained campaign against the ECI, the judiciary and other constitutional institutions.
The retired judges said they had no political brief and were speaking out because “silence is no longer a neutral choice”.
The signatories alleged that constitutional bodies were facing attacks driven by political interests, and warned of the consequences of undermining public trust in the country’s democratic institutions.
“Our concern is grave. India’s constitutional bodies are under sustained attack. The Election Commission of India stands at the centre of this assault,” the letter read.
Questioning allegations of “vote theft” made without supporting evidence, the former judges objected to constitutional authorities being publicly described as “thieves”, “puppets” and “compromised”.
“Criticism of institutions is a democratic right. Denigration is not,” the letter said.
In defence of SIR
Strongly defending the SIR, the judges described it as part of the Election Commission’s constitutional mandate to maintain accurate voter lists.
The letter pointed out that Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 empowers the ECI to revise electoral rolls at any time, and that intensive revisions have been conducted repeatedly since the first general elections.
“The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is part of that very design. Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 empowers the Commission to revise the rolls at any time. Intensive revisions have been carried out repeatedly since the first general elections. The last SIR was completed about two decades back. No one called those revisions a conspiracy,” the letter read.
The purpose of SIR is to remove names of deceased voters, duplicate entries, and people who have shifted their residence, while adding all eligible citizens to the rolls, the former judges wrote.
Decades of migration and urbanisation had made corrections to electoral rolls necessary, they stated, adding that “a clean roll protects every genuine vote”.
The letter also referred to the Supreme Court’s decision upholding SIR as lawful and within the ECI’s powers, and that the apex court had found the exercise to have a legitimate purpose and adequate safeguards on notice, hearing, objection and appeal.
“The protocols have not changed. The rules were not written in 2025. They were written in 1950. The uproar over SIR appears both sudden and remarkably convenient,” the letter read.
Warning over erosion of public trust
The ex-judges said India’s electoral system had repeatedly enabled peaceful transfers of power at the Centre and in states, with Opposition parties accepting election results.
“The protocols have not changed. The rules were not written in 2025. They were written in 1950,” the they reminded the protesters.
“Trust is the currency of democracy. When the ballot loses meaning, the street gains it,” the letter stated.
Appeal to political parties, media and citizens
The former judges said political parties, constitutional institutions, the media and citizens all have a role in protecting public confidence in democracy.
They urged political parties to contest elections without seeking to delegitimise them and to take complaints to the ECI and courts with evidence.
They urged the media not to amplify unverified claims. “A headline is not evidence, and repetition does not make an allegation the truth.”
They also called on constitutional bodies to remain transparent, address legitimate concerns and stay above political disputes.
Their message to citizens: “Verify the facts before acting on them. Do not let anyone convince you that your vote is meaningless. Your vote is your voice, and it matters.”
