‘Criticism is a Right. Denigration is Not’: Former Judges Defend Election Commission

Repeated allegations of “vote theft” and public attacks on election officials risk damaging citizens’ faith in the ballot, a group of former judges has warned in an open letter defending the Election Commission and other constitutional institutions.

The letter, dated October 7 and backed by 42 former judges, describes what its authors regard as a sustained campaign to discredit the Commission, the higher judiciary and statutory agencies.

“Criticism of institutions is a democratic right. Denigration is not,” it states.

Addressed to the people of India and titled "In Defence of Our Constitutional Institutions," the letter urges political parties to pursue electoral grievances through evidence and established legal channels. It also calls on constitutional authorities to remain transparent, explain their decisions and respond to legitimate concerns.

‘VOTE THEFT’ ALLEGATIONS UNDER FIRE

The authors object to constitutional authorities being labelled “thieves”, “puppets” and “compromised”, and to election officials being publicly threatened with reprisals after a change of government.

They contend that accusations are being advanced at press conferences without the evidence needed to establish them through legal proceedings. The letter also alleges that sworn declarations sought by the Election Commission have not been submitted.

These are the authors’ assertions. The document does not identify individual complaints or provide a case-by-case account of the evidence submitted to election authorities or courts.

The letter further accuses political parties of selectively questioning electronic voting machines after defeats while accepting victories delivered through the same system. Without naming a party, it criticises “a party that governed this nation for over five decades” for now alleging that the electoral system is rigged.

Activist organisations also come under attack. The authors accuse some groups of using litigation to give political allegations legal credibility and then attacking judicial decisions that do not favour their position. No organisations are named in the supplied document.

A DEFENCE OF VOTER ROLL REVISION

A substantial portion of the letter defends the Special Intensive Revision, or SIR, of electoral rolls.

The authors cite Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, in support of the Commission’s authority to undertake the exercise.

They describe revision as necessary to remove entries relating to deceased voters, duplicate registrations and people who have shifted residence, while ensuring that eligible citizens are included. Migration and urbanisation, they argue, make accurate electoral rolls essential to protecting genuine votes.

The letter also invokes the Supreme Court’s ruling upholding the SIR and points to safeguards involving notice, hearings, objections and appeals.

The Supreme Court upheld the Commission’s authority to conduct the Bihar SIR in May 2026. Implementation questions have nevertheless continued to reach the courts. In proceedings this week, the Supreme Court reportedly clarified that it had not approved modifications to Form 6, used for voter enrolment.

‘TRUST IS THE CURRENCY OF DEMOCRACY’

The letter’s central warning concerns the consequences of repeatedly telling citizens that elections cannot be trusted.

“Trust is the currency of democracy,” the authors write. “Tell citizens often enough that their vote does not count, and they stop believing in the ballot.”

They argue that such distrust could encourage unrest and create opportunities for fringe groups. The letter also refers to elements taking cues from abroad, without identifying them or supplying supporting material.

Its concluding appeal assigns responsibilities beyond political parties. It asks the media to scrutinise allegations before amplifying them and citizens to verify claims before sharing or acting on them.

Constitutional bodies, it says, must “stand firm, remain transparent, address legitimate concerns with clarity, and stay above the political fray”.

“Constitutional bodies do not belong to any government; they belong to the people of India,” the letter states.