Asserting that all decisions are unanimous, the Commission said the petitions on the matter filed in the top court are based solely on newspaper reports and should be dismissed.
The Election Commission, in its affidavit filed in the Supreme Court today, explained its decision-making process that has come into question after reports that two of the three Commissioners were not on board with the process adopted for the Special Intensive Revision of voter list and inclusion of new voters. Asserting that all decisions are unanimous, the Commission said the petitions on the matter filed in the top court are based solely on newspaper reports and should be dismissed.
“Unanimous Decisions”
The Commission reiterated that the three orders related to the SIR process issued in June 2025, October 2025, and May 2026 were also adopted unanimously.
The Commission said any decision-making process, suggestions, observations, varying views or queries by any official in the chain of command are taken into consideration for arriving at a decision. So the views of Election Commissioners are taken into account for the decision-making process. Any comments, questions, or suggestions made by the CEC or the Election Commissioners during the consideration of a file cannot be construed as the final decision of the Commission.
“The files put up by the respective divisions are sent first to one Election Commissioner and thereafter to the other Election Commissioner and then finally to the Chief Election Commissioner… Such approved decisions of the Commission are duly noted in the concerned files of the Election Commission and bear the signature of the ECs and CEC. Thereafter, the decision is notified and implemented by the ECI Secretariat,” the affidavit read.
“In any decision-making process, any suggestion, observation or query by the Chief Election Commissioner or the Election Commissioners either to other Election Commissioner/Chief Election Commissioner or to any officer of the Commission – does not constitute a decision of the Election Commission under Section 18 of the 2023 Act,” the Commission said.
Rejecting the allegations regarding changes to ‘Form 6, the Commission clarified that none of the three SIR orders have resulted in any changes to the statutory ‘Form 6’ used for voter registration.
On Form 6
‘Form 6’, it said, is the prescribed form for the registration of new voters. The ‘Declaration Form’ used in conjunction with it is a separate document, introduced as part of the SIR process.
The Commission has been caught in a huge controversy after a recent report said Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi were kept in the dark about various decisions taken by the poll body. They had objected to several of the decisions and even complained to the Chief Secretary, the report had said.
