![\"\u2018Stop](\"https:\/\/static.toiimg.com\/thumb\/msid-134503457,width-400,height-225,resizemode-4\/karnataka-fabless-centre-seals-seven-semiconductor-pacts-at-semicon-india-priyank-kharge.jpg\" "\\"Kharge")
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\nNEW DELHI: Priyank Kharge on Thursday hit out at the BJP<\/a> for defending the Election Commission<\/a> after the Form 6 row. He said that the ruling party should allow the poll panel to answer questions over alleged differences among its members on electoral-roll decisions.The Karnataka minister’s remarks came after a report by The Indian Express claimed that election commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had raised objections at least 14 times over 10 months to decisions and orders linked to electoral-roll procedures and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.\u201cWhy is the BJP so desperate to defend the Election Commission instead of allowing the Election Commission to defend itself? If there is nothing to hide, let the Election Commission face the questions directly. BJP leaders should stop acting as its unofficial spokespersons. Let the Commission come before the country, answer every question, disclose every fact and clear every doubt,\u201d Kharge wrote on X.<\/p>\n Kharge also questioned whether the controversy was being reduced to the role of chief election commissioner Gyanesh Kumar while overlooking wider questions about the functioning of institutions.\u201cLooks like the Modi Sarkar is preparing to sacrifice Gyanesh Kumar at the altar. But don\u2019t be fooled. Gyanesh Kumar is only the pawn,\u201d he wrote.He further questioned the legal protections available to top election officials and the way power is distributed within the poll body.\u201cThe bigger question is: who designed the system, who concentrated the power and who ensured that the Chief election commissioner received legal protection from civil or criminal proceedings for acts done in the discharge of their \u201cofficial duties\u201d?\u201dKharge alleged that accountability should not be limited to individual officials.\u201cAccountability cannot stop with the pawn. The two most powerful people at the top have systematically weakened democratic institutions to cling to power and shield a system of corruption and cronyism,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n The controversy has also drawn comments from former election commissioner Om Prakash Rawat, who said decisions of the three-member Election Commission have to be taken through consensus or a majority vote.\u201cThat is the Election Commission’s system, where all three commissioners give suggestions and contribute their views on how things should be done. That is standard procedure. However, when a decision is made, it must be by consensus or by a majority vote,\u201d Rawat said.\u201cIf two Commissioners are on one side, that forms the majority. Their objection is that while they expressed a different view, Gyanesh Kumar proceeded independently. That is the issue,\u201d he added.Rawat, however, ruled out the possibility of cancelling elections that have already been completed.\u201cNo one can cancel an election once completed. What is done is done,\u201d he remarked.On calls for Kumar’s resignation, Rawat said a formal process would first have to be initiated.\u201cSomeone has to initiate formal proceedings. If someone moves, then the subsequent steps will be seen,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Rawat also raised questions about changes to Form 6, which is used for voter registration. He said the Election Commission could not amend statutory requirements without the required approval.He explained that Form 6 has different requirements depending on the applicant’s circumstances. According to him, additional details may be sought from an older person who claims to be registering for the first time.\u201cBut what the Election Commission did this time is apply the second type of form to everyone. Even if someone is 18 years old, they are now required to provide details about where their parents were and what they did. This has led to controversy, as it effectively amounts to an amendment to Form 6. The Election Commission has amended it, even though the Election Commission has no authority to amend any form. That authority rests solely with the President,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Share your thoughts in the comments<\/p>\n<\/div>\n‘Gyanesh Kumar is only the pawn’<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n
Former EC raises questions over decision-making<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n
Row over Form 6<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n