Protests against electoral bodies signal a trust deficit. Suggest institutional reforms to strengthen the credibility of the Election Commission of India.

Article 324 gives the Election Commission of India (ECI) superintendence over elections and electoral rolls. In October 2026, protests in Delhi against the CEC and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of rolls led to petitions in the Supreme Court [1]. They show that the ECI's legitimacy depends on being seen as neutral, not only on its legal powers. Restoring trust therefore needs structural reform.

Roots of the Trust Deficit

• Appointments: In Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India (2023), the Supreme Court held free and fair elections to be part of the basic structure. It set an interim PM–LoP–CJI panel for appointments [2]. The 2023 CEC Act replaced the CJI with a Union Minister, which gives the executive a majority on the panel [3].
• Unequal tenure security: Only the CEC has judge-like protection against removal. The other ECs can be removed on the CEC's recommendation [4].
• Dependence on the executive: The ECI has no permanent independent secretariat; senior staff come on deputation [4].
• Opaque processes: Mass roll revisions and doubts about EVMs feed suspicion, even though the SC upheld EVM–VVPAT safeguards in 2024 [5].

Institutional Reforms

1. Neutral appointments: Restore a balanced collegium (PM, LoP, CJI) and publish the search committee's shortlist.
2. Removal parity: Amend Art. 324(5) so that ECs get the same removal protection as the CEC [4].
3. Autonomy of resources: Create a permanent ECI secretariat through a new Art. 324(2A) [4]. Charge the ECI's expenditure on the Consolidated Fund of India.
4. Cooling-off period: Bar former CECs and ECs from taking government posts after retirement, so that hopes of future jobs cannot bias their decisions.
5. Transparent roll revision: Publish booth-wise lists of additions and deletions with reasons. Set time-bound windows for claims and objections. Commission independent social audits of exercises like the SIR. Consult parties and civil society before such exercises, since coercive handling of protest only deepens distrust [1].
6. Verifiable technology: Base random VVPAT sampling on statistical design and publish the audit results [5].
7. Consistent MCC enforcement: Issue reasoned, published orders on complaints against all parties alike.

The ECI's credibility comes from four things: independent appointments, secure tenure, autonomy over resources, and transparent processes. Implementing the Law Commission's 255th Report [4] in the spirit of Anoop Baranwal [2] would make the ECI a neutral umpire that is also seen as neutral. That would protect the basic structure and serve SDG 16's goal of accountable institutions.