New Delhi, April 8 Senior Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi criticised the rejection of the opposition's notices to move a motion in Parliament to remove Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar from his post, alleging that the decision undermines constitutional processes and weakens accountability in a democracy.
Addressing a press conference here along with other opposition leaders, Singhvi said the move to reject the notices at a preliminary stage amounted to "strangling" the entire impeachment mechanism envisaged in the Constitution.
He was accompanied by Trinamool Congress (TMC) leaders Derek O'Brien and Sagarika Ghose, Rashtriya Janata Dal's (RJD) Manoj Jha, Aam Aadmi Party's (AAP) Sandeep Pathak, DMK's Yogesh and NCP-SP's Rajeev Jha.
"When accountability is adjourned intelligently, then democracy itself stands impeached," Singhvi said, adding that if the Election Commission's (EC) position is strong, there should be no fear of scrutiny.
"If the truth on the side of the CEC or the EC is so strong, why fear scrutiny? If the system is so clear, why try to have the motion unseated at the very threshold?" he asked.
The Congress leader argued that the presiding officers of Parliament had committed a "fundamental conceptual error" by collapsing a multi-stage constitutional process into a single decision at the admission stage.
He maintained that the Constitution provides for a detailed procedure involving an initial admission, the formation of a judicial committee, framing of charges, the submission of a report, parliamentary discussions and finally, a decision.
"By rejecting the motion at the very first stage, you effectively eliminate all subsequent stages, including scrutiny by an independent committee and Parliament's collective wisdom," Singhvi said.
"You have telescoped an elaborate constitutional architecture into the opinion of a single presiding officer. That is completely antithetical to what our framers envisaged," he added.
He also contended that the presiding officers exceeded the scope of a prima-facie assessment by delving into the merits of the allegations.
"You cannot conduct a mini trial at the threshold. That defeats the very architecture of the Constitution," the Congress leader said.
"Common sense tells you that if the presiding officer gives a conclusive view at this stage, there can never be an impeachment," he added.
Singhvi further said that the specific charges raised by the opposition, including those related to alleged electoral irregularities and delays in complying with judicial directions, were not adequately addressed in the rejection order.
"There is no answer to specific allegations. That is what happens when you deny a proper adjudicatory process," he said.
"You cannot reduce an independent constitutional procedure like impeachment to issues of sub-judice or contempt. They operate in entirely different domains," he added.
Calling the issue "a very serious matter", Singhvi said the decision casts "a shadow on the glory of Parliament" and raises concerns about the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) willingness to allow a scrutiny of the EC.
"The entire process has been reduced to the decision of one person, eliminating accountability. That was never the intent of the Constitution's framers," he said.
"You have killed the process at inception and eliminated any possibility of accountability," Singhvi asserted.
In its notices, the opposition had accused the current EC chief of failing to "maintain independence and constitutional fidelity", and acting under the "thumb of the executive".
The opposition had also questioned the process of Kumar's appointment as the CEC, accused him of holding a "partisan" press conference on August 17, 2025, targeting Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, and "discriminatory treatment" of opposition and ruling party members. It had also accused the CEC of executing the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise "in alignment with the ruling party's political objectives".
In separate orders, the Lok Sabha speaker and the Rajya Sabha chairman refused to admit the notices moved under Article 324(5) of the Constitution, read with other relevant constitutional and statutory provisions, praying for Kumar's removal as the CEC.
The notifications said the notices were rejected "after due consideration of the notice of motion and a careful and objective assessment of all relevant aspects and issues involved".