Former Attorney General of India Mukul Rohatgi has questioned the constitutional basis of any fresh impeachment motion against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, arguing that disagreements within the Election Commission do not by themselves amount to misconduct.
Speaking to NDTV, Rohatgi said an impeachment motion cannot be based on allegations that are vague or unsupported by strong facts. He argued that differences of opinion among members of a constitutional body are not, by themselves, evidence of an illegal or unconstitutional act.
The debate comes amid reports that opposition parties are considering another parliamentary move seeking Kumar’s removal. Under Article 324(5) of the Constitution, the Chief Election Commissioner can be removed only in the same manner and on the same grounds as a Supreme Court judge. The 2023 law governing the Election Commission repeats that protection.
Rohatgi also pointed to the structure of the three-member Election Commission, saying each commissioner has an equal vote and that differences should be resolved through the institution’s decision-making process. The Election Commission has separately maintained that its decisions, including those concerning the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, received unanimous approval, while individual observations should not be treated as formal dissent.
The controversy has intensified after former Kerala Chief Secretary Jiji Thomson alleged that Kumar had asked him in 2016 to contest the 2019 Lok Sabha election on a BJP ticket from Pathanamthitta. Thomson said he rejected the proposal. Kumar has not publicly responded to that allegation, according to NDTV.
The competing claims have added another layer to the ongoing political and legal debate over the Election Commission’s functioning.
