42 ex-judges write open letter, express concern over allegations against Election Commission

A group of 42 retired judges has written a strongly worded open letter expressing grave concern against attempts to undermine the Election Commission and other constitutional institutions and warned that such attempts will erode people’s faith. The signatories said they had no political brief and were speaking out because “silence is no longer a neutral choice”.

The former judges questioned the claims of “vote theft” without any supporting evidence, defended the legally established SIR exercise, and warned that such repeated attacks could erode public trust, adding, “When the ballot loses meaning, the street gains it.”

‘Some take their cues from beyond our borders’

“Unrest begins with a narrative. Anarchic and fringe elements then occupy the vacuum. Some are homegrown. Some take their cues from beyond our borders,” read the strongly worded letter.

They also warned against repeatedly branding constitutional authorities as “thieves”, “puppets” and “compromised”.

“We write because, in moments like these, silence is no longer a neutral choice. Our concern is grave. India’s constitutional bodies are under sustained attack,” said the ex-judges.

“The Election Commission of India stands at the centre of this assault. Even the higher judiciary, which we hold in high esteem, and statutory agencies have not been spared,” the letter added.

‘Calculated campaign driven by vested political interests’

The attacks are not reasoned critique, the former judges said.

“This appears to be a calculated campaign driven by vested political interests, with little regard for the potentially devastating consequences of destabilising the world’s largest democracy,” the former judges wrote.

“Trust is the currency of democracy,” the judges warned, adding, “Criticism of institutions is a democratic right. Denigration is not.”

The letter included sharp jabs at the Congress and the Cockroach Janta Party without naming either.

“Allegations of vote theft are made at press conferences, not before courts. When the Commission seeks a sworn declaration, none is filed. Electronic Voting Machines are blamed only after defeat. Victories won on the same machines go unquestioned. A party that governed this nation for over five decades now claims that the very system which elected it is rigged,” the letter read.

“Activist outfits with a long record of selective litigation lend these claims a veneer of legality. They file petitions, one after the other. They seldom file proof. The courtroom becomes a stage, and when the judgment is delivered, it is criticised whenever it does not serve their interests,” it added.

The signatories include former judges of the Supreme Court, Chief Justices of high courts, and others. Former Supreme Court Judges Justice Hemant Gupta, Justice Pankaj Mittal are among those who signed.

‘SIR a legally established exercise’

They also defended the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, saying it is a legally established exercise aimed at ensuring clean and accurate voter lists.

“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 read.

They said decades of migration and urbanisation had made corrections to electoral rolls necessary, adding that “a clean roll protects every genuine vote”.

“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 letter further read.

‘Do not amplify unverified claims,’ ex-judges urge media

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

They also urged citizens to “verify the facts before acting on them.”

“Do not let anyone convince you that your vote is meaningless. Your vote is your voice, and it matters.”

The former judges urged political parties to contest elections without seeking to delegitimise them and to take complaints to the Election Commission and courts with evidence.