The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Wednesday rejected a report claiming that two of its three commissioners had objected to decisions linked to the contentious Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process. The poll body said differences during internal discussions are a normal part of functioning in a multi-member constitutional institution.

The clarification came amid a major political dispute over the SIR exercise. Opposition parties have accused the ECI of trying to take control of the electoral process and have raised concerns over its impact on democracy.

“All actions of the ECI have been in accordance with laws and instructions of the Commission,” the poll body said in a statement.

The ECI said its three commissioners can have separate views, observations and suggestions during deliberations. However, it maintained that all final decisions are taken unanimously. The Commission also said that questions or inputs raised by commissioners while examining drafts should not be treated as final decisions.

“Differing views and observations are a normal part of deliberation in any institution. They are a part of the decision-making process before a final decision is taken. Not only the three Commissioners, but every officer of the Commission is fully authorised to give his suggestions to the Commission for improving the electoral system,” the statement said.

The clarification followed a report by The Indian Express published on Wednesday. The report claimed that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had formally raised objections at least 14 times over the past 10 months to decisions and orders of the Election Commission.

According to the report, the issues included addition, deletion and restoration of voters, along with changes to the voter registration process. It also said the two commissioners had questioned certain decisions that were allegedly taken without their knowledge.

In one instance, the report said, the commissioners described a change related to Form 6 for new voters as "unauthorised and illegal". Form 6 is used by eligible citizens to apply for inclusion of their names in the electoral rolls.

The report mentioned that Sandhu and Joshi separately approached the cabinet secretary over changes to oversight of IT systems used to manage electoral rolls.

The ECI, however, said that internal scrutiny and differences of opinion should not be interpreted as disagreement over final decisions. It stressed that commissioners and other officials are authorised to raise concerns and offer suggestions during the decision-making process.

The Commission's statement comes as political parties continue to debate the SIR exercise and its implications for voter rolls. The ECI maintained that its actions have followed existing laws and the instructions issued by the Commission.