The credibility of the Election Commission rests as much on perceived fairness as on legal validity. Comment in light of recent controversies.

Article 324 gives the Election Commission of India (ECI) the "superintendence, direction and control" of electoral rolls and elections [1]. Courts can certify that the ECI acted within this power. Only voters and parties can certify that it acted fairly. The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls shows that the second test is now the harder one.

Legal validity: largely secured

• In ADR v. ECI (2026), the Supreme Court held the SIR proportionate. It found the SIR traceable to Section 21(3) of the RP Act, 1950, read with Article 324, and compliant with the Rule 21A notice-and-hearing safeguards [1].
• It confined the Lal Babu Hussein (1995) presumption of citizenship to adjudicatory proceedings [1].
• The ECI points to draft rolls, claims-and-objections windows, appeals and party Booth Level Agents as safeguards [3].

Perceived fairness: under strain

• Burden shift: voters already on the rolls had to prove eligibility again. Aadhaar was accepted only after the Court ordered it treated as the 12th document [2].
• Error costs fall on citizens: the Court had to let wrongly deleted electors seek judicial review. It also sent citizenship-based deletions to the authority under the Citizenship Act [1].
• Appointment design: the 2023 Act gives the executive a 2:1 majority on the CEC selection panel and drops the CJI included under Anoop Baranwal (2023) [4]. The Act's validity is still before the Supreme Court [5].
• Trust deficit: opposition protests demanding the CEC's resignation show that a favourable verdict has not settled public doubts. The Court itself called for "a high degree of procedural fairness and institutional restraint" [1].

Restoring perceived fairness

• Publish booth-wise deletion lists that give the reason for each deletion.
• Verify doubtful entries instead of entire rolls. Scrutinise bulk deletion requests as strictly as claims to be added back.
• Protect appointments from executive control through a broad-based selection panel [4].

The SIR has passed the test of law but not yet the test of trust. Rolls that are both accurate and inclusive, prepared by a Commission whose neutrality is beyond doubt, would honour Article 326's promise of universal adult franchise and SDG 16.7's call for inclusive decision-making. The ECI's credibility is secure only when legality and legitimacy move together.