Growing friction between the Opposition and constitutional bodies is a challenge to electoral democracy. Suggest institutional safeguards to rebuild trust.

Article 324 gives the Election Commission of India (ECI) power over elections. That power works only as long as all sides trust the umpire. The INDIA bloc's nationwide agitation against the CEC and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) shows that this trust is breaking down. It was announced by 33 leaders from 19 parties [1]. The fix has to be better institutional design, not louder rhetoric.

Why the friction harms electoral democracy

• Disputed rolls: Bihar's SIR cut the roll from ~7.89 crore to ~7.42 crore electors. It left 65 lakh names off the draft and added only 21.53 lakh through Form 6 [2]. The totals cannot show whether those removed were ineligible or were genuine voters left out.
• Burden shifted to the voter: people left out had to apply again. This hurts migrants, the urban poor and first-time voters most.
• Perceived executive tilt: under the 2023 Act, the PM and a Cabinet Minister can outvote the LoP 2–1 on the selection panel. If the Lok Sabha is dissolved, the panel can be made up only of ruling-side members [3].
• Capacity strain: repeated schedule extensions point to rushed verification [4].
• Weaker legitimacy: when disputes move to the streets and to appeals before the CJI [1], people lose faith in the result, even if the charges later prove false.

Institutional safeguards

• Neutral selection: add a neutral member such as the CJI to the panel, as the Goswami Committee (1990), the Law Commission (2015) and Anoop Baranwal (2023) all proposed [3]. Give the largest opposition party's leader a seat when the LoP post is vacant.
• Equal tenure protection: ECs can now be removed on the CEC's recommendation alone [3]. They should get the same protection as the CEC, which is equal to a Supreme Court judge's.
• Wider talent pool: consider candidates beyond Secretary-rank officers [3].
• Verifiable deletions: publish deletions booth by booth, with the reason for each (death, shifted, duplicate). Let an independent team audit a random sample.
• Realistic timelines: fix a minimum number of BLO field days, and avoid revisions just before State polls.
• Parliamentary oversight: set up a bipartisan committee, modelled on the UK's Speaker's Committee [3].
• Structured consultation: hold all-party meetings before each revision and actively involve Booth Level Agents. Bihar had 1.6 lakh of them [2].
• Opposition's duty: use the claims-and-objections window and bring evidence of specific wrongly deleted voters to court.

Trust grows when the ECI is independent, its work can be checked, and parties engage responsibly. Neutral appointments, auditable rolls and bipartisan oversight would protect both clean rolls and full inclusion. That would uphold Article 326's promise of universal adult franchise and keep the ECI a referee that every side accepts.