Forty-two former judges have raised concerns over what they termed a sustained campaign aimed at undermining the Election Commission, the judiciary and other constitutional institutions.
They alleged that constitutional institutions were being subjected to attacks motivated by political interests and cautioned that such actions could erode public confidence in the country’s democratic institutions. “Criticism of institutions is a democratic right. The former judges also alleged that election officials had been publicly identified and threatened with reprisals in the event of a change in government. They further pointed out that no court had found the allegations against constitutional authorities to have been established.
In a strongly worded open letter, the signatories said they were not acting on behalf of any political interest and had chosen to speak out because “silence is no longer a neutral choice”. The former judges also questioned allegations of “vote theft” that they said had been made without supporting evidence. They objected to constitutional authorities being publicly labelled as “thieves”, “puppets” and “compromised”. Denigration is not,” the letter said.
The letter also cited the Supreme Court’s ruling that upheld the SIR as lawful and within the Election Commission’s authority.
The exercise is intended to eliminate the names of deceased voters, duplicate entries and individuals who have moved to another location, while ensuring that all eligible citizens are included in the electoral rolls, according to the former judges. They said decades of migration and rapid urbanisation had made the correction of electoral rolls necessary, stressing that “a clean roll protects every genuine vote”. The court recognised the exercise as serving a legitimate purpose and noted that adequate safeguards were in place, including provisions for notice, hearing, objections and appeals, according to the signatories.
