Why Some Citizens don’t trust on Election Commission of India?
Many citizens in India are increasingly distrustful of the Election Commission of India (ECI) because of perceived partisanship, opaque processes, and an accumulation of recent controversies. Survey data now show a sharp rise in the share of people who say they have “no trust” at all in the ECI, from low single‑digit percentages in 2019 to around 20–30% in several key states by 2025.
Perceived lack of independence
A major reason for distrust is the belief that the ECI has become more aligned with the ruling party than with its constitutional role as an impartial arbiter. Critics point to decisions such as delayed or uneven enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct, differential treatment of ruling‑party and opposition leaders, and accusations of allowing religious or polarised campaign rhetoric in some elections.
Handling of EVMs and vote‑counting
Allegations about electronic voting machines (EVMs) and vote‑counting have also damaged public confidence. Even though courts and technical experts have repeatedly found no large‑scale rigging, persistent political campaigns and social‑media narratives around “vote theft” or “EVM manipulation” have left many voters doubting that votes are counted as cast.
Voter‑roll and disenfranchisement fears
The recent Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls—especially in Bihar—has raised fears that poor, marginalised, and lower‑caste citizens may be wrongly removed from voters’ lists for lack of documents. Surveys show a large share of people lacking birth certificates or other documents the ECI has demanded, while Aadhaar is near‑universally held; critics argue that this selective documentation push can push vulnerable groups toward “doubtful citizens” status and erodes trust in the Commission’s inclusiveness.
Transparency and accountability issues
Many citizens feel the ECI is not sufficiently transparent or accountable in its major decisions. For example, the ECI’s initial reluctance to share real‑time voter turnout data in the 2024 general elections, and its refusal to share detailed turnout figures with the public, were seen as weakening trust and inviting suspicion of manipulation. Repeated refusals or delays in responding robustly to opposition‑party complaints (e.g., about campaign violations) are also interpreted by a section of the public as bias.
Polarised political narratives
The trust deficit is amplified by sharply polarised political narratives: some parties and sections of media portray the ECI as institutionally biased, while others accuse such critics of undermining India’s democratic institutions. This “trust war” between rival political actors makes ordinary voters more sceptical and less willing to accept the ECI’s verdicts as neutral, even in the absence of conclusive proof of systemic rigging.
In sum, distrust in the ECI is not about one single incident but a cumulative effect of perceived partisanship, opacity in key processes, fears of disenfranchising the poor and marginalised, and the way political actors publicly contest the Commission’s neutrality.
