The clamour for Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar's resignation is loud, but his reluctance to quit is rooted in law, precedent and institutional logic.
First, the Constitution protects him. A CEC can be removed only through impeachment-like process akin to a Supreme Court judge, not by street pressure or opposition marches to Nirvachan Sadan. No CEC in history has resigned under political demand; doing so would set a dangerous precedent where every future poll body chief could be hounded out by any powerful political bloc.
Second, the charges, though serious, are still contested. Opposition alleges vote chori through Special Intensive Revision, deletion of 5,000-7,000 votes per constituency via altered Form 6, and overruling two Election Commissioners who reportedly objected fourteen times in ten months. The Supreme Court on October 5 issued notice to ECI but refused to suspend Kumar, signalling that allegations need adjudication, not instant resignation.
Third, Kumar believes his work is corrective, not partisan. ECI argues SIR cleans bogus voters, centralises rolls, and secures electoral integrity. From his bureaucratic vantage, quitting mid-revision would admit guilt and derail the massive exercise before Bihar polls.
Finally, there is political backing. The Centre has dismissed INDIA bloc's march led by Rahul Gandhi as political theatre, standing firmly behind the Commission's autonomy.
In essence, Kumar is banking on judicial process over political noise.
కామెంట్లు