The Indian Express report said Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded at least 14 objections over a ten‑month period, alleging that several high‑profile decisions were taken in the name of the full commission without their knowledge and were "unauthorised and illegal".
In response, the ECI released a source‑based clarification stating that all decisions, including the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, were taken unanimously with the approval of both commissioners and the Chief Election Commissioner.
A subsequent written statement emphasized that the commission operates as a multi‑member constitutional body where written notes, observations and technical suggestions are routine mechanisms to ensure transparency, legal compliance and operational rigour.
The commission argued that highlighting a handful of internal notes while ignoring the broader record of approvals, instructions and roughly 40 new initiatives over the past year presents a skewed picture of its functioning.
The Indian Express also reported that the two commissioners had raised red flags over changes to Form 6, used for fresh voter registrations, and the increasing centralisation of the electoral roll database, warning that centralised software could override decisions of ground‑level Electoral Registration Officers and potentially block eligible voters.
The ECI countered that its digital platforms, such as ECINet, operate under strict data‑security protocols, with standard cybersecurity audits and controls to prevent unauthorised tampering, and that statutory officers retain their legally defined powers for registration and deletion.