At sixes and sevens, the ECI’s growing credibility crisis

1. At a Glance

• An op-ed by Ashok Lavasa, a former Election Commissioner and former Union Finance Secretary, argues that the Election Commission of India (ECI) faces an unprecedented credibility crisis over its impartiality and transparency [1].
• The immediate flashpoints are the ECI's actions and the questions around Form 6 and Form 7 (electoral-roll forms) [1].
• The article's thesis is that trust "built brick by brick" over years of transparency is being eroded by "the temperament of a few individuals" [1].
• UPSC relevance: GS-II covers constitutional bodies, electoral reforms and institutional autonomy. The ECI is a recurring Mains theme, and Article 324 is a recurring Prelims theme.

2. Why in the News

• An op-ed published on 13 October 2026 (The Hindu, Chennai edition, p. 10) asks whether Form 6 "will be its undoing" and whether Form 7 has caused it "unmanageable discomfiture" [1].
• The article says the ECI has become the object of "unprecedented public outcry, adverse media attention and social scrutiny" [1].
• The article's background context includes the electoral-roll revision exercises (Special Intensive Revision, SIR) that the ECI began in 2025, starting with Bihar [2].

3. Background & Evolution

• 25 Jan 1950: The ECI was constituted. This date is observed as National Voters' Day [2].
• 1989: The ECI became a multi-member body, which was then reverted. It was made permanently multi-member in 1993: one CEC and two ECs [2].
• 2019 General Election: The article cites a "lax, and sometimes overtly partial, approach" to alleged Model Code of Conduct (MCC) violations [1].
• March 2023: In Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India, the Supreme Court (SC) ruled that the PM, the Leader of the Opposition (LoP) and the Chief Justice of India (CJI) should select the CEC and ECs until Parliament made a law [2].
• December 2023: The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023 was enacted. It replaced the CJI on the selection committee with a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the PM [2].
• December 2024: The rules on sharing election documents were changed in a hurry. This followed a Punjab and Haryana High Court order for full disclosure. The change lets the ECI withhold video footage of voting after scheduled polling hours [1]. The amended provision is Rule 93(2)(a) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 [2].
• 2025 onwards: The ECI's SIR of electoral rolls led to disputes over roll inclusions and deletions. This is the backdrop to the Forms 6 and 7 controversy [1][2].

4. Core Static Facts

5. Multi-Dimensional Analysis

Legal / Constitutional

• Art. 324 gives the ECI plenary power. Its credibility depends on how that power is used, not just on the text of the Constitution [1][2].
• Removing the CJI from the selection committee (2023 Act) shifts the balance towards the executive. Critics argue this weakens the independence that Anoop Baranwal tried to secure [2].
• The December 2024 amendment came after a High Court disclosure order. This raises a question of whether rules are being changed to get around judicial scrutiny [1].

Ethical / Governance

• The article identifies a pattern: partial MCC enforcement, discriminatory treatment of Opposition parties, and shrinking transparency [1].
• Institutional legitimacy rests on perceived impartiality as well as actual impartiality. The article treats concerns "genuine or imagined" as worth addressing [1].
• The article frames the crisis as personality-driven, caused by "a few individuals", rather than structural [1].

Administrative

• Forms 6 and 7 are routine roll tools. Mass or bulk filing of Form 7 objections can lead to wrongful deletions. Weak checks on Form 6 can lead to ineligible inclusions. Both strain Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and Booth Level Officers (BLOs) [1][2].
• Limits on CCTV and webcasting footage reduce the ability to audit polling-day conduct after polling hours [1].

Social

• Errors in deletion fall hardest on migrants, the urban poor, women who change residence after marriage, and marginalised communities. This bears on the universal adult franchise guaranteed under Art. 326 [2].

Historical

• The ECI was historically praised for administering the world's largest electorate and for MCC enforcement after T.N. Seshan's reforms in the 1990s. The article contrasts that earned trust with its present erosion [1][2].

6. Recent Developments (last 12–18 months)

• 13 Oct 2026: The op-ed by former EC Ashok Lavasa flags the Form 6 and Form 7 controversies as the latest blows to ECI credibility [1].
• 2025–26: SIR of electoral rolls was carried out in phases, starting with Bihar (2025). It led to litigation and political disputes over deletions and documentation [2]. Specific 2026 dates were not verified in this session.
• Dec 2024: Rule amendment restricting public access to electronic records and polling-hour video footage, issued after the Punjab and Haryana High Court disclosure order [1].

7. Prelims Hooks

• The ECI is a constitutional body under Art. 324, not a statutory one [2].
• Form 6 is the application for inclusion of a new elector in the electoral roll [2].
• Form 7 is for an objection to inclusion, or deletion of a name [2].
• Form 8 is for correction or shifting of entries [2].
• The roll forms are prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, framed under the RP Act, 1950, not the RP Act, 1951 [2].
• Art. 325: no person can be excluded from the roll on grounds of religion, race, caste or sex [2].
• Art. 326: elections on the basis of adult suffrage. The 61st Amendment (1988) lowered the voting age to 18 [2].
• A CEC can be removed only in the manner of an SC judge. An EC can be removed only on the CEC's recommendation [2].
• Under the CEC & Other ECs Act, 2023, the selection committee is the PM, the LoP in the Lok Sabha and a Union Cabinet Minister. The CJI is not a member [2].
• Anoop Baranwal v. UoI (2023) is the SC ruling that put the CJI on the interim selection panel [2].
• The MCC has no statutory backing [2].
• National Voters' Day is on 25 January and marks the ECI's founding in 1950 [2].
• The Dec 2024 rule change allows the ECI to withhold post-polling-hours video footage. It followed a Punjab and Haryana High Court disclosure order [1].

8. Who Picks the Umpire: The Weak Spots in the 2023 Appointment Law

• The government holds two of the three votes on the selection committee
• The committee has the PM (chair), the Leader of Opposition (LoP) and a Cabinet Minister chosen by the PM [3].
• The PM and the minister will usually vote together. So the LoP can be outvoted every time.

• PRS Legislative Research (an independent body that studies laws) says this government majority "may undermine the independence of the ECI" [3].

• The shortlist can be ignored

• A Search Committee prepares a panel of five names [3].
• But the Selection Committee may also pick someone who is not on that panel [3].

• So the filtering step does not really limit the government's choice.

• An appointment stays valid even if the committee is incomplete

• The Act says an appointment is not invalid just because the committee has a vacancy or a defect [3].
• PRS points out that the PM and the Cabinet Minister posts can never be vacant. Only the LoP seat can be [3].

• So the one seat most likely to be empty is the Opposition's, and the Act still lets the government go ahead.

• Pay is linked to a bureaucrat, not a judge

• The Act ties the salary of the CEC and ECs to the Cabinet Secretary's level [3].
• A Supreme Court judge's salary is fixed by an Act of Parliament, so the government cannot change it on its own [3].

• Linking pay to a civil-service post makes the ECI look like part of the executive, not an equal of the judiciary.

• Only senior civil servants can be appointed

• Eligibility is limited to people who have held senior civil-service posts [3].
• PRS notes this may exclude other qualified people, such as judges, academics or election experts [3].
• It also means the commissioners' whole careers were spent serving the governments they now have to referee.

9. The Strongest Defence of the ECI — and Where It Falls Short

• Defence 1: Parliament had the right to make this law
• Article 324(2) lets Parliament make a law on appointments. Anoop Baranwal itself said the CJI arrangement would last only until Parliament made one [2].
• In September 2026 (2026 INSC 1040), the Supreme Court held that the 2023 Act is within Parliament's legislative competence (its power to make laws on the subject) [5].
• Concede: this is right. The law cannot be struck down just because Parliament made it.
• But: the same judgment said, prima facie (at first look), that giving the executive overwhelming power over selection harms the appearance of independence. It did not give a final ruling on this [5].

• So "legally valid" and "trusted by voters" are two separate tests. The ECI can pass the first and still fail the second.

• Defence 2: Cleaning the roll is the ECI's duty, and Form 7 exists for that

• Dead voters, people who have moved, and duplicate entries must be removed. Form 7 is the legal tool for this [2].
• Concede: a roll full of wrong names is also a threat to free elections.

• But: a deletion silently takes away a person's vote. A wrong inclusion adds one extra name. The harm is not equal. So the deletion process needs stronger checks, not weaker ones.

• Defence 3: The outcry is political noise from losing parties

• Concede: some criticism of every election body is partisan.
• But: the author is not an Opposition politician. He is a former Election Commissioner [1].

• And the December 2024 rule change came after a High Court ordered disclosure [1]. That is a pattern a neutral observer can check, not just a complaint.

• Why "a few individuals" is only half the answer

• The article blames the temperament of a few people [1].
• But the system gives those people room to act. The government controls selection [3]. ECs can be removed only on the CEC's recommendation, so a dissenting EC has no protection from the CEC [2].
• PRS notes the 2023 law ignored earlier suggestions on equal removal protection and administrative independence [3].
• Change the individuals but keep the structure, and the same problem can come back.

10. What Would Actually Rebuild Trust

• Parliament should put a neutral member on the selection committee
• Today the government has a 2–1 majority [3].
• Adding the CJI, or giving the LoP's vote a real veto, would mean no CEC is picked by the government alone.

• The Supreme Court has already flagged that executive dominance hurts the appearance of independence [5].

• Parliament should give ECs the same removal protection as the CEC

• Right now only the CEC can be removed like an SC judge. ECs can be removed on the CEC's recommendation [2].
• PRS notes the 2023 Act did not address this, although earlier committees had raised it [3].

• The Law Commission's reports No. 244 and No. 255 (Electoral Reforms, March 2015) recommended strengthening the ECI to give it more independence [4].

• Parliament should fix the commissioners' salary by law, as for SC judges

• This removes the link to the Cabinet Secretary's pay, which the government controls [3].

• The ECI should open its records, not close them

• The December 2024 rule lets the ECI withhold video footage of voting after scheduled polling hours [1].
• A body whose job is to be trusted gains most when anyone can check its work.

• Releasing records voluntarily, instead of changing the rules after a court order, is the quickest way to answer the article's charge.

• The ECI should publish who filed Form 7 objections, and how many, for each booth

• Bulk objections filed by one person or one group are the main risk of wrongful deletion [2].
• If booth-wise data is public, parties and citizens can spot mass filings before names are cut, not after election day.

11. Anchors for Answers

• Data: The 2023 Act's selection committee has 3 members, and 2 of them (the PM and a Cabinet Minister the PM nominates) come from the government [3]
• Report/Committee: Law Commission of India, 255th Report on Electoral Reforms (March 2015); with Report No. 244, it recommended strengthening the ECI's independence [4]. PRS Legislative Brief on the CEC Bill, 2023 [3]
• Law/Case: Art. 324(2) and 324(5); Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India (2023); Supreme Court, 2026 INSC 1040 (Sept 2026): the 2023 Act is within Parliament's competence, but executive dominance prima facie harms the appearance of independence [5]

12. Mains Relevance

• GS-II: Appointment to various constitutional posts, and the powers, functions and responsibilities of constitutional bodies. Salient features of the Representation of People's Act. Transparency and accountability.
• GS-IV: Integrity and impartiality in public institutions. Probity in governance.
• Question stems: 1. "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. (15 marks) 2. Discuss whether the appointment mechanism under the CEC and Other ECs Act, 2023 strengthens or weakens the independence of the ECI. (10 marks) 3. Electoral-roll revision is both an administrative exercise and a rights issue. Examine the safeguards needed to prevent wrongful disenfranchisement. (15 marks)

13. Related Topics to Study Next

• Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls: the direct context for the Form 6 and Form 7 disputes.
• CEC & Other ECs Act, 2023 and Anoop Baranwal (2023): the debate over how independent appointments are.
• Model Code of Conduct: its legal status and the record of enforcement, cited as a failure point in 2019.
• EVM–VVPAT debate and SC rulings: a parallel strand of trust in the electoral process.
• Electoral Bonds judgment (2024): transparency in election funding.
• Aadhaar–voter ID linkage (Election Laws (Amendment) Act, 2021): roll purification versus exclusion risk.
• Delimitation and One Nation One Election: upcoming changes to the electoral architecture.
• Comparative EMBs (election management bodies), e.g. the UK Electoral Commission: models of independence.

14. NCERT Concepts to Revise

• Election Commission of India (Polity): The article's subject: the constitutional body whose impartiality and credibility are questioned, with its Article 324 powers.
• Electoral roll (Polity): Forms 6 and 7 add and delete names on the roll, which is the core of the controversy.
• Special Intensive Revision (Polity): This roll-revision exercise is the backdrop to the disputes over wrongful inclusions and deletions.
• Model Code of Conduct (Polity): The article cites lax or partial enforcement of the code as a reason trust in the ECI has eroded.
• Election Commissioners (Polity): Appointment and removal of the CEC and ECs under the 2023 Act bear on the ECI's independence.
• Universal adult franchise (Polity): Wrongful deletions from rolls threaten every adult citizen's equal right to vote under Article 326.

15. Common Errors / Trap Areas

• Mixing up the two RP Acts: electoral rolls fall under the 1950 Act, while conduct of elections and disqualifications fall under the 1951 Act [2].
• Form numbers: Form 6 is for inclusion, not deletion. Deletion and objection is Form 7 [2].
• Selection committee: under the 2023 Act the CJI is not a member. The CJI sat on the panel only under the interim arrangement in Baranwal [2].
• Removal protection: only the CEC has removal protection on par with an SC judge. The ECs do not [2].
• MCC: it is not statutory. Aspirants often confuse it with provisions of the RP Act [2].
• Author's status: Ashok Lavasa was an Election Commissioner, not a CEC [1].