"The credibility of the Election Commission of India rests as much on perception as on its constitutional mandate." Critically examine this in the light of recent controversies.

Article 324 gives the Election Commission of India (ECI) plenary "superintendence, direction and control" of elections. But a referee's authority rests on public trust as well as on legal power. Recent controversies show that perception now matters as much as the mandate, though it cannot replace it.

Why perception matters

• Appointments: under the 2023 CEC Act, the government holds two of the three seats on the selection committee. PRS warns this "may undermine the independence of the ECI" [1].
• Judicial signal: in 2026 INSC 1040, the Supreme Court upheld Parliament's power to make the law. It also noted, prima facie, that executive dominance harms the appearance of independence [2].
• Transparency: in December 2024, a Punjab and Haryana High Court order called for disclosure. Rule 93(2)(a) was then amended to narrow public inspection of electronic records such as CCTV footage [3].
• Electoral rolls: in the Special Intensive Revision, bulk Form 7 objections raise fears of wrongful deletion. Weak Form 6 checks raise fears of ineligible inclusion. Both threaten adult franchise under Article 326.
• MCC: the Model Code of Conduct has no statutory backing. It works only if parties see the ECI's rulings as even-handed.

Limits of the statement

• The mandate remains the bedrock: Article 324 powers and the CEC's removal protection under Article 324(5) are enforceable, whatever public opinion says.
• Partisan noise: losing parties criticise every umpire, so perception alone is an unreliable test.
• Legitimate duty: removing dead, shifted and duplicate voters is a statutory obligation.
• Track record: the ECI conducts elections for the world's largest electorate, and power has changed hands peacefully.

Way forward

• Add a neutral member, such as the CJI, to the selection committee, and give ECs the same removal protection as the CEC.
• Fix commissioners' salaries by statute instead of linking them to the Cabinet Secretary's pay [1].
• Act on the Law Commission's 255th Report on strengthening the ECI's independence [4].
• Publish booth-wise Form 7 data and release poll records proactively.

The mandate gives the ECI power, but trust gives that power legitimacy. Structural safeguards and voluntary transparency would let the ECI be impartial and be seen to be impartial. That would secure free and fair elections, which are part of the Constitution's basic structure.