Stepping up its attack on the Election Commission, the Congress on Sunday said the poll panel’s latest measures related to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) amounted to an admission that the exercise had been a “disaster”, and claimed the changes would do little to address the alleged exclusion of voters. Congress general secretary in-charge of communications Jairam Ramesh described the Commission’s latest press note as a “desperate attempt at damage control that hides all and reveals nothing”, while questioning measures announced for voters whose names had been deleted or were at risk of deletion.
Ramesh’s remarks came a day after the Election Commission asserted that all SIR orders had received the unanimous consent of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi. The poll panel also defended changes related to Form 6 and sought to address questions over its internal decision-making following reports of differences among the three commissioners.
Congress questions home visits
Ramesh said the proposed measures around SIR showed that the exercise had run into serious problems and described the steps announced for deleted or at-risk voters as “piecemeal”. He claimed 5.43 crore voters were at risk of deletion and questioned the Commission’s decision to have Booth Level Officers visit their homes, arguing that such visits should have been properly conducted during the house-to-house enumeration phase itself.
“We know that in practice these visits were sparse and sporadic. What is the value of promising a second round of visits which likely will not happen? The logic of repeating a process done poorly once must be examined,” Ramesh said. He questioned the purpose of an exercise that, according to him, had become a “colossal waste” of public resources while inconveniencing citizens.
The Congress leader further claimed that nearly 14 crore voters had been deleted so far across three phases of SIR and criticised the process under which those seeking restoration of their names would have to apply afresh to Electoral Registration Officers. “First disenfranchise en masse, and then ask voters to get themselves re-added,” he said.
Ramesh also alleged that marginalised voters had been selectively deleted to benefit the BJP, an allegation that has been contested in the wider political row over SIR. He said the Commission’s latest statement had failed to adequately address the Congress’s concerns over exclusions from the electoral rolls.
ECINet comes under fire
A significant part of Ramesh’s attack centred on ECINet, the Election Commission’s digital platform used in electoral-roll management. He alleged that the software had been used to delete eligible voters and override decisions made by EROs, and questioned why the Commission was now proposing a committee to certify that the system complied with relevant laws and rules.
Ramesh argued that the proposed review itself raised questions about whether adequate safeguards had been in place before ECINet was deployed during SIR. He alleged that eligible voters had been deleted despite ERO decisions and cited Goa and West Bengal while demanding to know whether similar instances had occurred elsewhere.
The Congress leader also said the Commission had not explicitly reaffirmed that EROs would remain the final statutory authority over electoral rolls under the Representation of the People Act, 1950. He demanded greater transparency over the operation of ECINet and questioned the involvement of private technology companies in the platform.
Ramesh also referred to Tata Consultancy Services, saying its involvement had become known through the company’s disclosures rather than through the Election Commission. He questioned why the poll panel had not provided greater transparency about entities involved in operating its digital infrastructure.
AI use questioned
Ramesh further raised questions over the alleged use of artificial intelligence in preparing and scrutinising electoral rolls. Referring to the SIR exercise in Delhi, he claimed AI had been used for large-scale flagging of voters and cited references to some notices being “system-generated”.
He also alleged inconsistencies in the Commission’s position on AI, referring to an earlier statement by the West Bengal Chief Electoral Officer and a subsequent communication by the Election Commission to UN Special Rapporteurs. Ramesh demanded that the Commission clearly disclose whether artificial intelligence or automated systems were being used at any stage of electoral-roll preparation.
The Congress leader argued that the use of automated technology in a process capable of affecting voting rights required clear safeguards and public disclosure. He said questions over how voters were flagged, how decisions were reviewed and who retained final authority remained unresolved.
Form 6 row persists
Ramesh also challenged the Election Commission’s defence of changes concerning Form 6, which is used for enrolment of new voters. The Commission had referred to a Supreme Court order of May 27, 2026, while defending the addition of a declaration connected with the SIR process.
The Congress leader argued that the court’s order could not be used to justify changes allegedly made to the online Form 6 for voters beyond the SIR framework. He said the same judgment had emphasised that the Election Commission could not depart from statutory procedure without a rational basis.
Ramesh also questioned the alternative non-SIR Form 6 route, claiming the Special Summary Revision had remained frozen since 2024. He argued that without a separate non-SIR electoral roll being published, the alternative pathway offered little practical relief to affected voters.
Internal functioning questioned
The controversy has also focused attention on the Election Commission’s internal functioning following reports that Sandhu and Joshi had raised objections to some decisions and orders connected with SIR. The Commission has maintained that the SIR orders themselves received unanimous approval from all three commissioners.
The poll panel also clarified that letters sent by Sandhu and Joshi to the Cabinet Secretary related to an officer on deputation rather than a policy or IT division matter. Ramesh disputed that explanation, arguing that the correspondence arose from wider concerns about the functioning and oversight of the IT division.
He also pointed to procedural measures announced by the Commission, including circulation of agendas before meetings and timely completion of performance appraisals. Ramesh claimed the need to spell out such procedures now suggested that established institutional processes had not been adequately followed earlier.
The Congress has demanded that the ongoing SIR exercise be suspended and has continued to seek Kumar’s resignation. The Election Commission, meanwhile, has defended the legality of the exercise and maintained that its major SIR decisions were taken with the consent of all three members of the poll panel.