NEW DELHI: A group of 272 eminent citizens, including 16 judges, 123 retired bureaucrats, 14 former ambassadors and 133 retired armed forces officers, issued an open letter accusing leader of opposition Rahul Gandhi and the Congress of trying to erode public faith in the Election Commission and other constitutional institutions.The letter, titled “Assault on National Constitutional Authorities,” alleged that opposition leaders were attempting to manufacture a sense of institutional breakdown through what it described as “venomous rhetoric” and “provocative but unsubstantiated accusations.”
The letter said: “Some political leaders, instead of offering genuine policy alternative, resort to provocative but unsubstantiated accusations in their theatrical political strategy. After their attempts to tarnish the Indian Armed Forces by questioning their valour and accomplishments, and the Judiciary by questioning its fairness, Parliament, and its constitutional functionaries, now it is the turn of Election Commission of India to face systematic and conspiratorial attacks on its integrity and reputation.”The signatories singled out Rahul Gandhi for repeatedly alleging vote theft while, they said, failing to file a formal complaint or sworn affidavit to back his claims. They pointed to his assertions that he had “100 per cent proof” and an “atom bomb” against the Commission, alongside accusations of “treason,” and argued that such remarks came “without the prescribed sworn affidavit” required for accountability.The letter also noted that similar accusations had been amplified by Congress leaders, opposition parties and allied NGOs, including claims that the Election Commission had acted like the “B-team of the BJP.” It argued these assertions collapsed under scrutiny, pointing to the ECI’s public release of its methodology and verification done under court oversight.Also Read |’25 lakh vote chori in Haryana’: Rahul Gandhi drops ‘H files’; alleges state, national level theftIt said, “Moreover, several senior figures of Congress and other political parties, leftist NGOs, ideologically opinionated scholars, and a few attention seekers in other walks of life, have joined in with similarly blistering rhetoric against SIR, even declaring that the Commission has descended into complete shamelessness by acting like the ‘B-team of the BJP.’ Such fiery rhetoric may be emotionally powerful but it collapses under scrutiny, because the ECI has publicly shared its SIR methodology, overseen verification by court-sanctioned means, removed ineligible names in a compliant manner, and added new eligible voters.”The signatories described this pattern of criticism as “impotent rage,” stating that leaders who faced electoral setbacks “lash out at institutions instead of rebuilding their credibility.”The letter said, “This pattern of behaviour reflects what might be called ‘impotent rage’ deep anger born of repeated electoral failure and frustration, without a concrete plan to reconnect with the people. When political leaders lose touch with the aspirations of ordinary citizens, they lash out at institutions instead of rebuilding their credibility. Theatrics replace analysis. Public spectacle takes the place of public service.”Invoking the legacy of former chief election commissioners TN Seshan and N Gopalaswami, the letter said, “Today, thinking of ECI, the country also remembers the likes of TN Seshan and N Gopalaswami, whose unyielding leadership transformed the Election Commission into a formidable constitutional sentinel. They did not court popularity. They did not chase headlines. They enforced the rules fearlessly, impartially, relentlessly.”Calling for transparency, legal accountability and respectful political conduct, the letter concluded by saying, “We call upon the Election Commission to continue its path of transparency and rigour. Publish complete data, defend itself through legal channels when necessary, and reject politics dressed up as victimhood. We call upon political leaders to respect the constitutional process, to compete not through baseless accusation but through policy articulation, and to accept democratic verdicts with grace.”
