The Guardians of Democracy: Why India’s Election Commission is Under Unprecedented Scrutiny 

India’s Election Commission, long revered as the impartial guardian of the world’s largest democracy, is facing a profound crisis of credibility. The institution is besieged by allegations from a charged opposition, which accuses it of voter list manipulation and collusion with the ruling party. A contentious voter roll revision in Bihar, which purged millions of names, has intensified claims of disenfranchisement. The Commission’s defensive posture, including a combative press conference, has further eroded perceptions of its neutrality rather than assuring the public.

Crucially, this is not merely a political dispute; recent surveys indicate a alarming decline in public trust among the electorate. The situation underscores that for a democratic institution, the perception of impartiality is as vital as its technical accuracy. The ECI’s greatest challenge now is to transcend the political fray and proactively rebuild the faith that is essential to its legitimacy.

The Guardians of Democracy: Why India’s Election Commission is Under Unprecedented Scrutiny 

In the grand theatre of Indian democracy, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has long played a role above the fray. It was the impartial umpire, an institution whose authority was rarely questioned and whose credibility was the bedrock of the world’s largest electoral exercise. Today, that role is being challenged not from the sidelines, but from the center stage, in a high-stakes drama that questions the very integrity of the democratic process. 

The immediate spark is a political firestorm in the state of Bihar. A Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter rolls, the first in over two decades, resulted in a staggering 6.5 million names being omitted from the draft list. The ECI argues this was a necessary purge of duplicates, deceased voters, and migrants who have moved on. The opposition, however, sees a more sinister design: the systematic disenfranchisement of voters, particularly marginalized migrants who may struggle with the “onerous documentation” required to reclaim their voting rights. 

This controversy in Bihar amplified a much larger allegation made by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. Using the ECI’s own data, he pointed to a parliamentary constituency in Karnataka allegedly containing over 100,000 “fake voters.” This charge—of collusion with the ruling BJP to rig the 2024 general election—struck at the heart of the ECI’s mandate. The Commission’s response—a rare, defiant press conference where the Chief Election Commissioner demanded Gandhi provide proof under oath or apologize—did little to quell the anger. For many, it inadvertently reinforced the opposition’s narrative of an institution that had become adversarial rather than adjudicative. 

Beyond the Political Slugfest: A Deeper Institutional Crisis 

To view this solely as a political battle is to miss the larger, more troubling story. The crisis facing the ECI is not just about specific allegations; it’s about a dangerous erosion of public trust, the lifeblood of any democratic institution. 

1. The Perception of Impartiality is Fracturing: As former CEC S.Y. Quraishi astutely noted, “the perception of impartiality is as important as its reality.” The ECI’s technical explanations for the voter roll discrepancies may be logically sound—former CEC N. Gopalaswami rightly points out that intensive revisions always lead to large numerical changes. However, its communication strategy has been perceived as combative and dismissive. When the institution tasked with safeguarding democracy appears to be in a public argument with the political opposition, it inevitably chips away at its image of neutrality.
2. The Court’s Intervention is a Telling Sign: The Supreme Court’s directive for the ECI to publish a searchable list of omitted voters was a significant moment. It was a procedural correction that highlighted a failure in the Commission’s own approach to transparency. Opting to publish scanned physical copies instead of machine-readable data created unnecessary opacity, fostering suspicion where there should have been clarity. The court’s rap on the knuckles signaled that even if the ECI’s intentions were pure, its methods were lacking.
3. The Data Points to a Trust Deficit: The most alarming evidence comes from the data itself. A recent survey by CSDS-Lokniti reveals a sharp decline in public trust in the ECI. In Uttar Pradesh, the proportion of people with no trust in the Commission skyrocketed from 11% in 2019 to 31% in 2025. This isn’t just a sentiment among opposition parties; it’s a growing belief among the electorate. This erosion is a “big worry,” as the agency’s chief put it, because without trust, the legitimacy of every future election result is potentially undermined.

The Path Forward: Rebuilding the Fortress of Trust 

So, what can be done? The solution lies not in defiant press conferences but in a conscious, visible, and unwavering recommitment to transparency. 

• Over-communicate: In an era of misinformation, the ECI must become the single, most reliable source of information. It should proactively explain its processes, anticipate concerns, and publish data in open, analyzable formats before being compelled to do so by the courts. 

• Embrace Auditable Processes: The ECI should invite respected, non-partisan civil society organizations and technical experts to audit its processes voluntarily. Demonstrating a willingness to be scrutinized by independent bodies would be a powerful trust-building measure. 

• Reclaim Neutral Ground: The language and tone of the Commission must be meticulously calibrated to be that of a referee, not a player. Its responses to allegations should be factual, data-driven, and devoid of any perceived political sentiment. 

The true test of the Election Commission’s credibility is not whether it can win a political argument, but whether it can win back the unshakeable faith of the Indian people. The allegations will fade, Bihar will vote, but the scar on the institution’s reputation may remain if not treated with care. The strength of Indian democracy has always been its ability to self-correct. The ECI now has the opportunity to lead that correction, proving that its most important duty is not just to conduct elections, but to guard the faith placed in them.