Tripura CM Manik Saha says opposition parties blame EVMs and the Election Commission after election losses, while defending the SIR process and highlighting the Election Commission’s September 26 clarification on unanimous approval by all three commissioners.
Tripura Chief Minister Dr. Manik Saha has accused opposition political parties of repeatedly questioning Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and the Election Commission whenever they lose elections or fail to receive public support. Speaking at a press conference, Saha said such allegations had become a recurring political practice and argued that criticism of constitutional institutions should not undermine public confidence in the democratic process.
The Chief Minister’s remarks came amid a wider political debate over the Election Commission of India’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and reports about differences of opinion within the poll panel. The Election Commission on September 26 clarified that its order for conducting SIR across the country had received the unanimous approval of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
Saha said discussions and differences of opinion within a constitutional body should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of a lack of democracy. According to him, healthy democracies allow institutions to debate issues internally before reaching a final decision.
“There can be discussions within the Election Commission; there can be differences of opinion. I think that is one of the signs of a vibrant, healthy democracy,” Saha said.
He added that different viewpoints could emerge during deliberations, but consensus reached after discussion was itself a positive feature of a democratic institution. He argued that the presence of debate within the Election Commission should not be portrayed as evidence that democratic institutions were not functioning.
The Chief Minister referred specifically to developments on September 26, when the Election Commission issued a detailed clarification amid reports concerning differences among its members over SIR-related matters. The poll panel stated that its June 24, 2025 order for the nationwide SIR had been issued with the unanimous approval of the Commission. It also said subsequent SIR decisions were taken with the approval of the full Commission.
Saha said the clarification demonstrated that the final decision on SIR had the signatures and approval of all three Election Commissioners. He maintained that the decision should therefore be understood as a collective decision of the constitutional body rather than the decision of an individual office-holder.
“Therefore, it is clear today that this special process of revising the voter list, or the Special Intensive Revision, has been completed on the basis of the signatures of all the commissioners and their unanimity and consensus,” he said.
The Election Commission’s September 26 statement came after reports about alleged differences within the poll panel. According to the Commission, the SIR order was unanimously approved by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi. The Commission also said that certain letters concerning an officer on deputation were not related to policy matters of the poll panel or its IT division.
Saha said the principal objective of the SIR process was to create an electoral roll that is accurate and transparent. He referred to the need to identify and remove names that may belong to deceased persons, people who have shifted from a particular location, duplicate or otherwise ineligible entries, and persons who do not meet the legal requirements for inclusion as voters.
He also referred to the legal safeguards available to people affected by the electoral-roll revision process. According to Saha, deletion of a person’s name from the electoral roll through the SIR process does not amount to cancellation of that person’s Indian citizenship. He described the process as one concerning eligibility to vote and electoral-roll verification.
The Chief Minister further argued that mechanisms remain available for eligible persons to seek inclusion or correction in the electoral roll. The Election Commission’s September 26 clarification also announced measures intended to assist people who received notices during the ongoing SIR process. The Commission said Booth Level Officers would visit the homes of certain persons to collect documents in cases involving unmapped entries and logical discrepancies, with hearings required only in exceptional circumstances.
Saha accused the opposition, including parties associated with the INDIA bloc, of attempting to turn the SIR issue into a political controversy. He said opposition parties frequently question constitutional institutions after electoral defeats, while remaining silent when election results go in their favour.
“The opposition can call it a smear campaign or propaganda, and its main purpose is to tarnish the main institutions of the country,” Saha said.
He stressed that he was not speaking on behalf of the Election Commission but was responding politically to what he described as allegations against constitutional institutions. According to the Chief Minister, maintaining public trust in the electoral and democratic system was important.
Saha also referred to the 2021 West Bengal Assembly elections while making his argument. He said examples of constituencies where voter names had been removed during electoral-roll revision should be examined against the eventual election results. He cited around 20 Assembly constituencies and claimed that several of those seats were subsequently won by the Trinamool Congress.
The Chief Minister used the example to question the argument that electoral-roll revision necessarily benefited one particular political party. His comments were part of his broader contention that allegations against the Election Commission should be examined against election data and institutional procedures rather than being automatically accepted as evidence of political bias.
Saha also referred to the 2026 Kerala Assembly election while discussing the opposition’s criticism of the Election Commission. He said he had personally campaigned in Kerala and pointed out that the Congress-led United Democratic Front won 97 seats in the election. He argued that if concerns about the Election Commission were based simply on electoral outcomes, similar questions could have been raised after that result as well.
His broader argument was that political parties should not judge the functioning of electoral institutions solely according to whether election results favour or disadvantage them.
Saha also highlighted the tenure of current Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. Kumar assumed office as India’s 26th Chief Election Commissioner on February 19, 2025, succeeding Rajiv Kumar. He had previously served as an Election Commissioner from March 2024.
The Election Commission has maintained that its decisions are guided by the Constitution, electoral laws, rules and established procedures. When Kumar assumed office in February 2025, he said the Election Commission would remain with voters in accordance with the Constitution, electoral laws, rules and instructions.
Against this backdrop, Saha said opposition parties should refrain from repeatedly targeting EVMs and the Election Commission whenever election results do not meet their expectations.
“It has become a habit for them. People now understand these things,” he said, while maintaining that the Election Commission was functioning in a systematic manner and according to law.
The Chief Minister’s comments come at a time when the SIR process has become a significant political issue, with opposition parties raising questions about voter-list revision, documentation requirements and the functioning of the Election Commission. The poll panel, meanwhile, has publicly stated that its SIR decision received unanimous approval from all three commissioners.
The debate has consequently centred not only on the electoral-roll revision exercise but also on public confidence in constitutional institutions. While Saha defended the Election Commission and its decision-making process, opposition parties have continued to raise concerns over aspects of the SIR exercise and the functioning of the poll panel.
For Saha, however, disagreement within an institution should be viewed as part of democratic deliberation when it ultimately leads to a collective decision. He said institutional discussions, differences of opinion and consensus are all part of a functioning democracy.
| Also Read: 79% Voting Recorded in Tripura Village Committee Polls Till 4 PM |
The Chief Minister maintained that political parties have the right to raise questions but argued that repeated allegations against electoral institutions following election defeats could affect public confidence in the democratic system. He therefore called for greater emphasis on facts, electoral procedures and institutional decisions while discussing EVMs, voter rolls and the Election Commission.
| Also Read: CPI(M) alleges fake voting and polling agent obstruction in TTAADC polls |
The Election Commission’s September 26 statement has provided a formal institutional response to the recent debate over SIR and reported differences within the poll panel. With the Commission stating that the nationwide SIR order was approved unanimously, the issue remains a matter of political and public discussion as the electoral-roll revision process continues.
