Published Sep 27, 2026 | 5:43 PM ⚊ Updated Sep 27, 2026 | 5:43 PM
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh.
Synopsis: A day after the ECI announced a series of measures to address concerns about the ongoing SIR, Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh termed them a “desperate attempt at damage control”. He said the “piecemeal” measures would do little to mitigate the mass disenfranchisement caused by the SIR process so far.
A day after the Election Commission of India announced a series of measures to address concerns about the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR), Congress general secretary (communications) Jairam Ramesh on Sunday, 27 September, termed them a “desperate attempt at damage control”.
In a statement on Saturday, the ECI said Booth Level Officers (BLOs) would visit the homes of people issued notices during the ongoing SIR for being unmapped or having logical discrepancies.
It said such people would not have to appear before Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) unless the ERO considered a hearing necessary. It also announced special help desks and camps for people living in night shelters, labourers, poor people and homeless people.
The poll body said the declaration attached to Form 6 for SIR had been upheld by the Supreme Court and that the forms prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, would be used outside the SIR period.
A meeting of the Election Commission of India was held today, 26 September 2026, at 3:00 PM at Nirvachan Sadan, New Delhi.
Chief Election Commissioner Shri Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Dr. Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Dr. Vivek Joshi were present in today’s meeting.… pic.twitter.com/WZoqEIXVJq
— Election Commission of India (@ECISVEEP) September 26, 2026
It also announced a committee headed by a Senior Deputy Election Commissioner, with an independent expert from an IIT or IIIT, to review ECINet for compliance with the Acts and Rules. The Commission said field officers had role-based access to the system according to their statutory powers and that further flexibility would be provided where required.
The Commission extended the period for filing claims and objections in Delhi to 30 October and the disposal period to 30 November. In Maharashtra, the corresponding dates were extended to 12 October and 10 November.
Also Read: ‘SIR is a bloodless political genocide to exterminate citizenship’: Dr Parakala Prabhakar
Ramesh said the measures amounted to an admission that the exercise had failed to work as intended and had instead become “a colossal waste of public resources and a nuisance for every citizen”.
“The piecemeal measures for deleted or at risk voters will do little to mitigate this mass disenfranchisement,” he said.
“For 5.43 Cr voters who are at risk of deletion, the EC has promised that Booth Level Officers (BLOs) will now visit their houses. This was supposed to happen during the house-to-house enumeration phase. 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.”
The Press Note issued by the Election Commission last night has already been debunked and exposed for what it is—a desperate attempt at damage control that hides all and reveals nothing. Here is a further demolition of that thoroughly meaningless Press Note. pic.twitter.com/J9dequTQrr
— Jairam Ramesh (@Jairam_Ramesh) September 27, 2026
The ECI said SIR had been completed in 20 States and Union Territories and the final number of electors would be known after final publication in the remaining 12 States of Phase III. It also said anyone left out during SIR or thereafter, including young and first-time voters, could apply to the concerned ERO for inclusion through continuous updation.
An estimated 14 crore names have been removed from the electoral rolls during the SIR process so far.
“For nearly 14 Cr voters deleted so far in all 3 phases of the SIR, the Commission’s answer is that they must now apply afresh to their Electoral Registration Officers (EROS) for inclusion. First disenfranchise en masse, and then ask to voters to get themselves re-added,” Ramesh said.
“There is widespread evidence of targeted deletions of marginalised voters to benefit the BJP. The EC has not addressed this charge.”
Also Read: Poll panel orders review of ECINet amid SIR row; BLOs to visit voters issued notice
Ramesh also noted that the ECI’s proposal for a committee to certify that ECINet “complies with the Acts and Rules” itself raised questions about the legality of the software, after it was used in electoral roll preparation during the SIR across the country.
“We have clear evidence that ECINet was used to delete eligible voters, overriding ERO decisions – this is illegal,” he said.
“EC claims to be resolving the issue in Goa, where it was caught. What about West Bengal where the same thing happened at a much larger scale? What about all other states where EROs may have been overruled to delete eligible voters?”
Ramesh also questioned the lack of clarity over the role of EROs during the exercise.
“EC has still not clearly stated that EROs will be the final authority over the electoral roll, as defined in the Representation of the People Act, 1950,” he said.
He also questioned the lack of transparency over who operates ECINet.
“EC has not been transparent about who is operating ECINet. It is only from TCS disclosures that it was revealed they were involved. Why this lack of transparency? Does the ongoing struggle to control the Tata Group have anything to do with this?”
Also Read: Why CEC Gyanesh Kumar should resign, and why the appointment process needs to change too
The Election Commission has asserted that its letter to the Cabinet Secretary concerned “the working of an officer on deputation” and was not related to any policy matter of the Commission or its IT division.
It said work redistribution orders issued by the officer were not implemented after orders by two Commissioners and that oversight of the IT division by the Deputy Election Commissioner was never withdrawn.
An investigation by The Indian Express last week had revealed that the two Election Commissioners had written to the Cabinet Secretary expressing concerns over the integrity of the voter software.
Ramesh said the ECI’s clarification answered none of the questions raised by the report.
“The EC has downplayed the letter as concerning ‘the working of an officer on deputation’ and unrelated to ‘any policy matter of the IT division’,” he said.
“However, the letter was prompted by an order that removed oversight from the IT division. It stemmed from concerns repeatedly raised around the opaque and non-compliant operation of the IT division. The core issue was that the IT division was overriding ‘statutory safeguards’ through ECINet. These issues still remain unaddressed.”
Also Read: Judiciary committed to protecting students’ fundamental rights: CJI Surya Kant
Ramesh also said the ECI’s lack of transparency in the use of artificial intelligence in electoral roll preparation was “dangerous”.
“The disastrous Delhi SIR has revealed that Al is being used in the large-scale flagging of voters. The Delhi CEO’s defence was that some of the notices were “system-generated”. The EC has not been transparent about the use of AI in the SIR. In November 2025, the West Bengal CEO admitted to the use of AI. But in July 2026, the EC told UN Special Rapporteurs that “no artificial intelligence is used at any stage,”” he said.
“The EC must be transparent about AI use. A rethink is required on integrating AI so deeply into a critical process determining citizens’ right to vote.”
Ramesh said the ECI had also not denied the “illegal change” to Form 6 and had offered only a weak defence of it.
“The EC has attempted to use an SC judgement from May 27, 2026, permitting the addition of a new declaration in Form 6 to defend the change,” he said.
“But this falls flat since the change was made in July to the online Form 6 for all voters, not just for SIR. The same judgement also states that the ECI on its own cannot depart from the statutory procedure without a rational basis.”
Ramesh said the ECI’s “promise” to follow basic operating procedures, including circulating agendas before its meetings and completing performance appraisals on time during the rest of the SIR, was another admission that such procedures had been disregarded.
“We know that the ECs themselves were being kept in the dark and finding out things from the media. This flagrant disregard for the law and procedures in a Constitutional authority is deeply troubling,” he said.
(Edited by Dese Gowda)
