Guwahati: Forty-two former judges and retired constitutional officeholders have defended the Election Commission of India (ECI) amid growing criticism of the poll panel, warning that repeated attacks on constitutional institutions could erode public trust in the country’s democratic system.

In an open letter, the signatories said they had no political brief and were speaking out because “silence is no longer a neutral choice”. They alleged that constitutional bodies were facing politically driven attacks and said the ECI had become a particular focus of such criticism.

“Our concern is grave. India’s constitutional bodies are under sustained attack. The Election Commission of India stands at the centre of this assault,” the letter said.

The former judges questioned allegations of “vote theft” made without supporting evidence and objected to constitutional authorities being publicly described as “thieves”, “puppets” and “compromised”.

“Criticism of institutions is a democratic right. Denigration is not,” they said.

The signatories also said election officials had been publicly named and threatened with reprisals in the event of a change in government. They noted that no court had found the allegations against constitutional authorities to be proven.

The letter strongly defended the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, describing it as part of the ECI’s constitutional mandate to maintain accurate voter lists.

It cited Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which empowers the Commission to revise electoral rolls at any time. The signatories said intensive revisions had been carried out repeatedly since the first general elections, with the last SIR completed about two decades ago.

“The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is part of that very design. Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 empowers the Commission to revise the rolls at any time. Intensive revisions have been carried out repeatedly since the first general elections. The last SIR was completed about two decades back. No one called those revisions a conspiracy,” the letter said.

According to the former judges, the exercise is intended to remove the names of deceased voters, duplicate entries and people who have shifted residence, while adding all eligible citizens to the electoral rolls.

They said decades of migration and urbanisation had made corrections to voter lists necessary, arguing that an accurate electoral roll protects genuine voters.

The letter also referred to the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the SIR as lawful and within the ECI’s powers. It said the court had recognised a legitimate purpose for the exercise and safeguards including notice, hearing, objection and appeal.

“The campaign of casting suspicion continues unabated, regardless of facts or consequences,” the signatories said.

They added: “The protocols have not changed. The rules were not written in 2025. They were written in 1950. The uproar over SIR appears both sudden and remarkably convenient.”

The former judges said India’s electoral system had repeatedly enabled peaceful transfers of power at the Centre and in the states, with opposition parties accepting election results.

They warned that repeatedly telling citizens that their votes do not count could undermine confidence in the electoral process.

“Trust is the currency of democracy,” the letter said. “When the ballot loses meaning, the street gains it.”

The signatories urged political parties to contest elections without seeking to delegitimise the electoral process and to raise complaints before the Election Commission and courts with supporting evidence.

They also appealed to the media not to amplify unverified claims, stating, “A headline is not evidence, and repetition does not make an allegation the truth.”

The former judges called on constitutional institutions to remain transparent, address legitimate concerns and stay above political disputes. They urged citizens to verify claims before acting on them and said voters should not be made to believe that their votes are meaningless.

The letter concluded that constitutional institutions belong to the people of India rather than any government and called on citizens to defend institutions that safeguard their democratic rights.

“We remain, in service of the Constitution,” the signatories said.