TruthWave Level-5 Public Investigation | Block 1 of 25
Block 1 — Prologue & Constitutional Foundations
SUMMARY
India’s Election Commission was created to be the neutral referee of the world’s largest democracy. But constitutional gaps, political pressure and 40 years of Supreme Court warnings have quietly pushed the institution into a deep trust crisis.
PROLOGUE — INDIA’S REFEREE IS UNDER QUESTION
The Election Commission of India (ECI) sits at the heart of the world’s largest election system.
Every major election in India involves:
- Over 960 million voters
- More than 10 lakh polling stations
- Millions of school teachers, clerks, police, and officers on election duty
On paper, the ECI looks untouchable: a constitutional body, above governments, above parties, above day-to-day politics.
In reality, something else has been happening for the last 20 years:
- When a party is in power, it usually praises the ECI.
- When the same party becomes opposition, it starts attacking the ECI.
- Civil society groups flag problems in transparency and voter rolls.
- Former Chief Election Commissioners publicly warn that independence is weakening.
- Retired IAS and IPS officers describe pressure during election duties.
- The Supreme Court keeps warning that the ECI’s structure is vulnerable.
TruthWave is not here to choose a party.
TruthWave is here to investigate the system that decides who gets to rule India.
This investigation will cover:
- Previous governments and current government
- Ruling party allegations when they were in opposition
- Opposition allegations when they were in opposition
- Civil society and academic data
- Supreme Court cases and warnings
- Ground-level experiences of officers and voters
Block 1 explains what the Constitution intended, and how the ECI was built with hidden weaknesses.
SECTION 1 — WHAT THE ELECTION COMMISSION WAS SUPPOSED TO BE
The Election Commission is born from a single, powerful line in the Constitution:
Article 324: “The superintendence, direction and control of elections… shall be vested in a Commission.”
Source:
(https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/COI.pdf)
This one clause gives the ECI huge power:
- It decides when elections happen.
- It decides how elections are conducted.
- It can transfer officers during elections.
- It can order repolls in disputed booths.
- It can suspend officers for misconduct.
- It can freeze or allot party symbols.
In theory, this makes the ECI more powerful than the central or state governments during the election period.
But the Constitution creators left some critical things undefined:
- How exactly should Election Commissioners be appointed?
- Should the ruling government have full control over appointments?
- Should the ECI get its budget directly from Parliament, not a ministry?
- Should the ECI have its own permanent field staff, or depend on state officers?
- Should the ECI be legally required to publish full data and reasons for its decisions?
Because these questions were never answered properly, every government that came to power found ways to influence the ECI indirectly — not always illegally, but structurally.
TruthWave is not saying “this party captured the ECI.”
TruthWave is saying: the ECI was never fully protected from being captured.
CASE STUDY — THE FOUNDERS’ HOPE VS TODAY’S REALITY
When the Constitution was being written, many members of the Constituent Assembly feared political interference in elections.
Some said versions of this idea:
“If elections are not free, India’s future will not be free.”
They created a powerful Election Commission, but they made one quiet assumption:
“Future governments will behave responsibly.”
They did not imagine:
- 24×7 TV propaganda
- Social media disinformation
- Massive corporate-funded campaigns
- Hyper-polarised politics
- Complex electronic voting technology
In short:
India’s politics moved to 2025.
India’s election institutions stayed stuck in 1950.
TRUTHWAVE COMMENTARY — WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THE NEXT GENERATION
The Constitution put a crown on the ECI’s head,
but never gave it a helmet.
The ECI looks powerful from a distance,
but it was never properly shielded from political pressure.
For the next generation of Indians, this is the key lesson:
Democracies don’t collapse only through coups.
They also collapse slowly, when powerful institutions are left unprotected.
TruthWave is writing this investigation so that young Indians can see the pattern, not just the latest headline.
SECTION 2 — 40 YEARS OF SUPREME COURT WARNINGS (EXPLAINED)
For decades, the Supreme Court has been sending the same message:
“Your Election Commission is important — but vulnerable.”
Let’s look at some key cases.
1. Mohinder Singh Gill vs Chief Election Commissioner (1978)
Source:
(https://indiankanoon.org/doc/901440/)
The Supreme Court declared that free and fair elections are part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution.
That means they cannot be compromised, even by Parliament.
The Court also made it clear that the ECI must act like a truly independent authority, not an extension of the government.
TruthWave commentary:
This judgment gave the ECI a strong moral shield.
But a moral shield is not enough when real-world political pressure is high.
2. PUCL vs Union of India — NOTA Case (2013)
Source:
(https://indiankanoon.org/doc/11081311/)
In this case, the Court introduced NOTA (None of the Above), giving voters a way to officially express dissatisfaction with all candidates.
This strengthened the idea that elections must respect the voter’s right to choice and protest.
TruthWave commentary:
The Court pushed for more transparency and more voter power.
But while voter tools improved, the institution running the elections did not structurally improve at the same speed.
3. VVPAT Paper Trail Case — Subramanian Swamy vs ECI
Source:
(https://indiankanoon.org/doc/102317645/)
Petitioners demanded that electronic voting should have paper verification.
The Supreme Court agreed that:
For public confidence, some form of paper audit is necessary.
The Court pushed the ECI towards VVPAT — paper slips that show which candidate the vote went to.
But even today:
- VVPAT slips are not fully counted.
- Only a small percentage of booths are checked.
- Many people still do not understand how the system works.
TruthWave commentary:
Technology exists to build trust.
But trust is not built when that technology is used in a minimal, restricted way.
4. Hate Speech Cases — ECI as a “Silent Spectator” (2019–2024)
Source:
(https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-ec-hate-speech-233014)
In several hearings on hate speech during elections, the Supreme Court openly questioned the ECI:
“Why are you not acting strongly?”
“Why are you standing silent?”
The message was clear:
The Court expected the ECI to punish powerful campaigners when they violate the Model Code of Conduct (MCC).
TruthWave commentary:
When the referee ignores fouls from powerful players,
ordinary players lose faith in the game.
That is what is happening to public trust in elections.
5. Anoop Baranwal vs Union of India (2023) — Appointment System Exposed
Source:
(https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2021/35064/35064_2021_1_1501_41441_Judgement_02-Mar-2023.pdf)
For decades, the government of the day had almost total control over who becomes Election Commissioner and who becomes Chief Election Commissioner.
In this case, the Supreme Court said:
Appointment of Election Commissioners only by the executive is unconstitutional.
The Court suggested a temporary system where:
- Prime Minister
- Leader of Opposition
- Chief Justice of India
would together choose Commissioners, until Parliament created a proper law.
Soon after, Parliament passed a new law that removed the Chief Justice from the panel, bringing appointment power closer to the government again.
TruthWave commentary:
This is one of the biggest red flags.
The Court tried to push India towards more independence,
but the political system quickly pulled it back towards control.
6. Electoral Bonds Case (2024) — ECI’s Private Concern, Public Silence
Source:
(https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2021/35064/35064_2021_1_1501_41441_Judgement_15-Feb-2024.pdf)
In the Electoral Bonds judgment, the Supreme Court disclosed that:
- The ECI had privately written to the government warning that electoral bonds could increase opacity in political funding.
- But the ECI never strongly and publicly opposed the scheme before it was struck down by the Court.
TruthWave commentary:
When an institution speaks the truth quietly in private,
but stays silent in public,
it sends a message to citizens:
“We are worried — but we are not free.”
For the next generation, this is the most important question:
Do we want an Election Commission that fears speaking openly?
SECTION 3 — HUMAN IMPACT: WHEN INSTITUTIONS LOOK STRONG BUT FEEL WEAK
These are not just legal stories. They touch real people.
Case 1 — A Confused First-Time Voter
A young voter from Uttar Pradesh said during TV coverage:
“Yesterday TV channels showed 55% turnout.
Today they say 62%.
Which number is true? Did more people vote at night?”
She is not a legal expert. She doesn’t know Form 17C, VVPAT, or Article 324.
She only knows this:
Numbers are changing. Something feels wrong.
That feeling is dangerous for a democracy.
Case 2 — The Polling Officer Who Feels Alone
A government school teacher in Maharashtra, acting as a Presiding Officer, told a reporter:
“We get indirect pressure from local party workers.
We are scared to complain.
Tomorrow we still have to live in the same town.”
On paper, the ECI can transfer officers, suspend them, act tough.
In reality, election staff are part of state bureaucracies that answer to state governments, not just to the ECI.
Case 3 — A Retired Returning Officer Speaks
A retired IAS officer from Karnataka, who once served as Returning Officer, said in a public interview:
“On paper, the ECI is strong.
But in the field, officers feel exposed.
They know that after the election, the politicians will still be there.”
This means the frontline implementation of the ECI’s power is fragile.
SECTION 4 — WHY TRUTHWAVE USES BLOCKS, NOT ONE SIMPLE ARTICLE
This investigation is not a typical “one article, one day” piece.
TruthWave is building:
- 25 blocks
- Each block = one full investigation
- Each block has raw URLs you can click and verify
- Each block focuses on one layer of truth: legal, political, technical, financial, global, human
At the end, we will connect all blocks into one massive continuous article.
This way:
- You can read step by step.
- You never have to “trust us blindly”.
- You always see where we got our information from.
This is how proper institutions talk to the public.
If official institutions won’t do it, TruthWave will.
WHY THIS MATTERS
If an ordinary citizen starts thinking:
“ECI bhi kisi ke under hai”
(“Even the Election Commission is under someone’s control”)
then democracy has already lost half its power.
India cannot afford an Election Commission that is:
- structurally weak,
- politically influenced,
- silently afraid,
- or slowly losing public trust.
This is why Block 1 exists:
to show that the problem is systemic, not just about one ruling party or one opposition.
CONTINUE TO BLOCK 2
In Block 2, we go through 20 years of political allegations against the ECI:
- Allegations during the UPA era
- Allegations during the NDA era
- Allegations by regional parties
- Cases of MCC bias, turnout controversies, EVM/VVPAT disputes
- ECI’s public responses
- TruthWave commentary explaining each case
👉 [Read Block 2] https://truthwave.in/election-commission-of-india-allegations-analysis/