There has been news of serious questions being raised in the Election Commission of India regarding Voter Data and Election Software. According to an investigative report by The Indian Express on Wednesday, September 23, Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Dr. Vivek Joshi lodged several objections within the commission over the last 10 months. The matter escalated so much that both the Election Commissioners wrote to Cabinet Secretary T.V. Expressed concern by also writing a letter to Somanathan (Cabinet Secretary TV Somanathan).
According to the report, both the election commissioners filed objections on the records on a total of 14 occasions. The main issue in these is said to be related to the software related to the voter list and the role of local officials in its operation.
What is the controversy regarding ECINet?
The Election Commission (ECI) launched a digital platform named ECINet in January 2026. Its objective was to bring many apps and portals of the Commission under one technical system.
According to The Indian Express report, Sandhu and Joshi expressed concern that control over voter data is gradually being limited to the central level. He said that this could affect the role of those local officials, who have been given the responsibility of preparing the voter list and making changes in it under the law.
Questions raised on the powers of ERO
According to the report, Electoral Registration Officers i.e. ERO are the authorized officers to add, delete names in the voter list and take decisions on related claims and objections.
Both election commissioners reportedly expressed concern that in some cases officials were not getting the full access to the software they needed to perform their statutory functions.
Sandhu said in his comments filed in August that several officials told him that they were not getting “proper and complete access” to ERONet. He also raised questions regarding access control at the central level.
Objection to new software module and Form 6 also
According to the report, both the commissioners also raised questions regarding some changes made in the software and new modules. Sandhu had reportedly said in April that many new modules and portals were developed in the IT division, information about which was not given to him earlier.
At the same time, both the Election Commissioners had also lodged objection regarding a change made in Form 6. Form 6 is used for registration of new voters. According to a separate report in The Indian Express, questions related to SIR were added to the new form and the commissioners termed this change as “illegal” and “unauthorized”.
Demand for independent audit from IIT experts
According to the report, Vivek Joshi had proposed to take the help of IIT experts for independent investigation of the voter software.
Its purpose was to ensure that only those officers who have been given the responsibility under the law have the right to make changes in the voter database. Besides, a suggestion was also made to create an internal audit system to check the software as per the legal process.
How did the matter reach the Cabinet Secretary?
The dispute took a new turn at the end of July. According to the report, on July 28, through an order related to the administrative work of the Election Commission, changes were made in the monitoring system at one level of the IT division.
After this, on July 29, Sandhu and Joshi separately met Cabinet Secretary T.V. Wrote a letter to Somanathan. Both of them expressed objection to this administrative order and demanded appropriate action. The next day, both of them together gave instructions to keep that order aside and continue the old system.
What did the Election Commission say?
After this report came out, the Election Commission denied the matter of internal breakdown or institutional crisis. According to the Commission, all official decisions taken in the last one year have been unanimous and are in accordance with the statutory provisions.
ECI also said that suggestions or objections coming from individual members is a normal thing in the institutional system and it should not be seen as a breakdown in the Commission.
