Critically analyse whether the Election Commission of India functions as a collegial body or as a CEC-centric institution. Suggest reforms to strengthen its internal democracy.

Article 324 created the Election Commission of India (ECI) as a multi-member body. In October 2026 the ECI filed a joint affidavit in the Supreme Court saying its decisions are "not unilateral" [1]. In practice, though, the ECI is collegial on paper and CEC-centric in its incentives.

Collegial features

• Sequential file route: Files go from one EC to the other EC and only then to the CEC, so every member sees every decision [1].
• Judicial endorsement: In T.N. Seshan v. Union of India (1995), the Supreme Court upheld the multi-member ECI. It held that the CEC is only first among equals and that decisions are taken by majority.
• Common statutory framework: The 2023 Act gives the CEC and the ECs a single law for appointment, salary and term [2][3].

CEC-centric features

• Unequal tenure security: Only the CEC can be removed in the same way as a Supreme Court judge [1]. An EC can be removed on the CEC's recommendation (Article 324(5)). An EC who often disagrees with the CEC therefore depends on that same CEC to keep their job.
• Routing ≠ deciding: The affidavit shows that files move in order. It does not show how disagreements are settled or whether dissent is recorded [1].
• Executive-dominated appointment: The Selection Committee has three members: the PM, a Cabinet Minister nominated by the PM, and the Leader of Opposition [3]. The government side holds two of the three votes. This undid the interim CJI-inclusive panel set up in Anoop Baranwal (2023).
• Litigation over the CEC personally: Petitioners have asked the Court to restrain the CEC himself [1]. This shows that people see the CEC, not the Commission, as the real locus of power.

Reforms for internal democracy

• Equal removal protection for ECs, as recommended by the Law Commission's 255th Report (2015).
• A more neutral selection panel (PM, LoP, CJI) to make appointments more credible.
• Published business rules that make majority voting binding and require dissent to be recorded, so the EC → EC → CEC route becomes a real check [1].
• Rotation of portfolios among the three members, so expertise is not concentrated in one office.

In short, the ECI is collegial in law and procedure but tilted towards the CEC in tenure and appointment. Giving all three members equal security and making its rules transparent would turn the Seshan principle into everyday practice. That would protect the free and fair elections that the Supreme Court treats as part of the Constitution's basic structure.