- Opposition plans new move to remove Chief Election Commissioner.
- New notice being drafted, seeking broader MP support.
- Previous removal attempts were rejected by presiding officers.
- Allegations focus on CEC’s alleged lack of independence.
Opposition parties are preparing a fresh attempt to initiate removal proceedings against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, undeterred by the rejection of their earlier notices, according to news agency PTI.
Leaders from multiple parties, including the Indian National Congress, All India Trinamool Congress, Samajwadi Party, and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, are in discussions, with at least five senior MPs working on drafting a new notice.
It remains undecided whether the motion will be introduced in the Lok Sabha, the Rajya Sabha, or both Houses, as was attempted previously.
Renewed Push After Bill Defeat
According to the rpeort, the opposition has been encouraged by the recent defeat of the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026 in the Lok Sabha. Leaders are now aiming to gather broader political support and secure signatures from at least 200 MPs.
“We want to make a statement. We first need to prove that the number last time was underestimated,” a source tld PTI.
Allegations Against CEC
In their earlier notices, opposition parties accused Kumar of a “failure to maintain independence and constitutional fidelity” and alleged that he functioned under the “thumb of the executive.”
The charges included claims of “proved misbehaviour,” citing concerns such as:
- A compromised and executive-influenced appointment
- Alleged partisan functioning, including a “graded response” approach against opposition leaders
- Obstruction of electoral fraud investigations
- Lack of transparency in data sharing
- Enabling large-scale disenfranchisement through Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercises in states like Bihar
The notices also alleged delays in complying with directions of the Supreme Court of India and alignment with the political executive, undermining the autonomy of the Election Commission of India.
Presiding Officers Reject Earlier Notices
However, both Om Birla and C. P. Radhakrishnan rejected the earlier notices, stating that the allegations, even if assumed to be true, did not meet the constitutional threshold of “misbehaviour” required for removal.
They noted that issues related to appointments or prior government roles do not amount to misconduct, and that differences in administrative decisions or public statements lack evidence of deliberate abuse of authority.
The responses also emphasised that matters such as electoral roll revisions and data-sharing fall within the Commission’s constitutional mandate and are subject to judicial review.
With a renewed strategy underway, the opposition now faces the challenge of building wider parliamentary consensus while meeting the stringent legal criteria required to initiate removal proceedings.
The development signals escalating political confrontation over the functioning and independence of India’s electoral watchdog ahead of crucial elections.
