Public Impeachment of the Chief Election Commissioner: Constitutional Provisions and Political Controversy

Context

On 31 October 2026, INDIA bloc opposition parties organised a symbolic “public impeachment” of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar at the residence of Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge in New Delhi. The event included a mock hearing and mock parliamentary and judicial proceedings, with former Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar presiding.

Public Impeachment

1. Public impeachment is a political and symbolic form of protest, not a procedure recognised by the Constitution.
2. It involves publicly presenting allegations, conducting mock hearings or proceedings and demanding accountability from a public official.
3. It does not have the legal authority to remove the CEC from office.
4. The CEC can be removed only through the constitutionally prescribed parliamentary process.

Background of the Controversy

1. Allegations regarding SIR: Opposition parties accused the Election Commission of partisan and discriminatory conduct during the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.
2. Concerns over electoral processes: The Opposition also alleged obstruction of investigations into electoral fraud and raised concerns about the transparency of electoral-roll revision.
3. Parliamentary removal motions: In March 2026, opposition MPs submitted notices in both Houses seeking the removal of CEC Gyanesh Kumar.
4. Rejection of motions: The Lok Sabha Speaker and Rajya Sabha Chairman rejected the motions in April 2026, stating that the allegations lacked the proof necessary to establish a prima facie case of proved misbehaviour.
5. Public protest: Following the rejection, opposition parties organised the symbolic public impeachment to raise political and public pressure for accountability.

Constitutional Provisions Governing Removal of the CEC

1. Article 324(5): The CEC can be removed only in the same manner and on the same grounds as a Supreme Court judge. Other Election Commissioners can be removed only on the CEC’s recommendation.
2. Article 124(4): Provides two grounds for removal:

• Proved misbehaviour: Established misconduct.
• Incapacity: Inability to perform official duties.

1. Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968: Regulates the investigation procedure for allegations of misbehaviour or incapacity.

Procedure for Removal of the CEC

1. Initiation: Motion signed by at least 100 Lok Sabha MPs or 50 Rajya Sabha MPs.
2. Admission: Speaker of Lok Sabha or Chairman of Rajya Sabha decides whether to admit the motion.
3. Inquiry Committee: A three-member committee comprising a Supreme Court judge, a High Court Chief Justice and a distinguished jurist investigates the charges.
4. Investigation: The committee examines evidence and gives the CEC an opportunity to defend himself/herself.
5. Parliamentary Approval: Both Houses must pass the motion by a special majority:

• Majority of the total membership of each House.
• At least two-thirds of members present and voting.

1. Final Removal: The address is presented to the President, who issues the removal order.

Key Issues and Constitutional Concerns

1. Independence of the Election Commission: Allegations of partisan conduct raise concerns about the institutional independence and neutrality of the Election Commission.
2. Political Accountability vs Institutional Autonomy: While elected representatives have the right to question constitutional authorities, political pressure should not undermine the independent functioning of such institutions.
3. High Threshold for Removal: The stringent removal procedure protects the CEC from arbitrary political action. However, it also makes accountability dependent on establishing legally recognised grounds.
4. Transparency in Electoral Processes: Disputes surrounding electoral-roll revision highlight the need for transparent procedures, accessible records and effective grievance-redressal mechanisms.
5. Public Trust in Elections: Perceptions of political bias can weaken citizens’ confidence in the electoral process, even before allegations are judicially or institutionally established.
6. Institutional Accountability: Rejection of removal motions without publicly detailed reasons can raise questions about transparency and the adequacy of parliamentary scrutiny.

Significance of Constitutional Safeguards

1. Protects Electoral Independence: Prevents the government or parliamentary majority from arbitrarily removing the CEC.
2. Ensures Institutional Stability: Allows the Election Commission to function without constant fear of political retaliation.
3. Upholds Constitutionalism: Requires allegations of misconduct to be examined through a legally prescribed process.
4. Maintains Electoral Credibility: An independent Election Commission is essential for free and fair elections, which form the foundation of representative democracy.

Way Forward

1. Strengthening Transparency: Make electoral-roll revision, voter inclusion and deletion procedures more transparent and accessible.
2. Institutional Accountability: Establish effective mechanisms for addressing complaints against the Election Commission without compromising its autonomy.
3. Reasoned Parliamentary Decisions: Presiding officers should provide clear and reasoned explanations when deciding whether to admit removal motions, consistent with applicable rules.
4. Strengthening Internal Functioning: Promote transparency, collegial decision-making and clear documentation of decisions within the Election Commission.
5. Constructive Political Dialogue: Resolve electoral disputes through constitutional institutions and established legal procedures rather than relying solely on political confrontation.
6. Building Public Confidence: Strengthen voter awareness, grievance-redressal mechanisms and public access to reliable electoral information.

FAQs

Q1. Under which Article is the removal of the CEC provided?

Ans: Article 324(5) of the Indian Constitution.

Q2. On what grounds can the CEC be removed?

Ans: Only on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.

Q3. What majority is required for the removal of the CEC?

Ans: A majority of the total membership of each House and a two-thirds majority of members present and voting in each House.

Q4. Who issues the final removal order?

Ans: The President of India, after both Houses of Parliament pass the removal address with the required special majority.

Q5. Can other Election Commissioners be removed in the same manner as the CEC?

Ans: No. They can be removed by the President only on the recommendation of the CEC.

Q6. Is the term ‘impeachment’ constitutionally used for the removal of the CEC?

Ans: No. The Constitution uses the term removal. Impeachment under Article 61 specifically relates to the President.

Q7. Which law regulates the inquiry procedure for removal?

Ans: The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.

Q8. Has any Chief Election Commissioner been removed through this procedure?

Ans: No Chief Election Commissioner has been successfully removed through this constitutional process.