Derek O'Brien Calls for Revival of Motion Seeking CEC Gyanesh Kumar's Removal

Derek O'Brien Seeks Revival of CEC Removal Motion

Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Derek O’Brien on Wednesday called for the revival of a Rajya Sabha motion seeking the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

His demand came after a report claimed that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had formally objected on several occasions to decisions and orders of the Election Commission during the past 10 months, including matters connected with electoral-roll revision.

O’Brien said the earlier motion, submitted months ago with the support of more than the required number of Rajya Sabha MPs, should now be brought before the House.

What Did Derek O'Brien Say?

O’Brien said that more than 60 Rajya Sabha members had signed the earlier motion seeking Kumar’s removal, while 50 members were required to initiate the process.

Reacting to the latest report about objections raised by the two Election Commissioners, he called for the motion to be brought out and used the phrase “Impeach CEC to save democracy” in a post on X.

His latest demand is a political response to the reported internal disagreements within the Election Commission. It does not itself constitute a parliamentary decision to remove the CEC.

What Is the Alleged Dispute Within the Election Commission?

A report cited by Opposition leaders said Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had objected at least 14 times over a period of 10 months to decisions and orders allegedly taken without their knowledge.

The reported objections concerned several aspects of electoral-roll management, including the addition, deletion and restoration of voters and changes to voter-registration procedures.

The report has triggered renewed criticism from several Opposition parties, which have questioned the functioning of the poll panel under Kumar.

Election Commission Sources Dispute the Rift Claim

Election Commission sources have rejected the suggestion that the poll panel has been divided over SIR decisions.

According to the sources, all Election Commission decisions, including those related to the Special Intensive Revision, were taken unanimously with the approval of both Election Commissioners and the Chief Election Commissioner.

The competing accounts mean that the reported objections and the circumstances surrounding individual decisions remain a matter of dispute.

What Is the Special Intensive Revision?

The Special Intensive Revision, or SIR, is an Election Commission exercise aimed at reviewing and updating electoral rolls.

The process has become a major political issue, particularly because of the scale of voter verification and deletion exercises in several states.

Opposition parties have raised concerns about whether eligible voters could be excluded during the process, while the Election Commission has maintained that electoral rolls must be checked to identify ineligible, duplicate, deceased or shifted voters and ensure that eligible citizens remain registered.

When Was the Removal Motion Submitted?

The latest controversy revives an issue that had already reached Parliament earlier in 2026.

A removal motion was submitted to the Rajya Sabha Chairman earlier this year under the constitutional framework governing removal of the Chief Election Commissioner. Reports at the time said the notice had been signed by more than the minimum number of MPs required to initiate the process.

The motion alleged “proved misbehaviour” in the discharge of the CEC's functions and referred to several actions and decisions relating to electoral matters.

What Does the Constitution Say About Removing a CEC?

The removal of the Chief Election Commissioner is governed by Article 324(5) of the Constitution.

The provision states that the CEC can be removed from office in the same manner and on the same grounds as a judge of the Supreme Court.

The process therefore involves Parliament and has a substantially higher threshold than an ordinary parliamentary resolution.

The legal framework also provides for an inquiry process under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, as applicable to the removal procedure.

Earlier Motion Was Rejected

An important point in the chronology is that an earlier removal motion was not allowed to proceed after the Rajya Sabha Chairman and Lok Sabha Speaker rejected notices submitted in March 2026.

India Today reported in April that a notice signed by 63 Rajya Sabha MPs was rejected by the Rajya Sabha Chairman, while the Lok Sabha Speaker also rejected the corresponding Opposition notice.

That means O’Brien's latest demand is for the earlier political initiative to be brought out or revived in light of the new controversy, rather than a removal proceeding already being underway.

What Were the Earlier Opposition Allegations?

The earlier Opposition notice contained several allegations against Kumar.

These included claims of partisan or discriminatory conduct, alleged obstruction of investigations into electoral matters and concerns over the handling of the SIR exercise.

The allegations were made by Opposition MPs and were not equivalent to judicial findings against the CEC. The earlier notices were ultimately rejected by the presiding officers of the two Houses.

Why Has the Issue Returned Now?

The issue has resurfaced because of the latest reports about disagreements among members of the Election Commission.

Opposition parties have used the reported objections to renew their criticism of the CEC and the SIR process.

TMC's O’Brien has specifically argued that the earlier removal motion should now be brought forward again, while other Opposition leaders have made separate demands concerning Kumar and the electoral-roll revision exercise.

Other Opposition Leaders Also Raise Questions

O’Brien's statement came amid broader Opposition criticism.

Congress leaders questioned whether disputed Election Commission decisions were properly authorised, while CPI(M) MP John Brittas called for Parliament to initiate a removal process.

Other Opposition leaders have also referred to the reported objections by the two Election Commissioners while questioning the functioning of the poll panel.

These statements represent political positions and do not establish that the reported objections make any Election Commission decision unlawful.

What Does the Latest Demand Mean?

O’Brien's demand puts renewed political pressure on the Rajya Sabha leadership over the handling of the earlier removal motion.

However, the removal of a CEC is governed by a specific constitutional procedure. A political demand to revive a motion does not by itself remove the office-holder or establish the allegations contained in such a motion.

Any further action would depend on the parliamentary procedure and decisions of the relevant authorities.

CEC Removal Debate Comes Amid Electoral-Roll Dispute

The controversy is closely linked to the wider political dispute over SIR.

Opposition parties have argued that the electoral-roll revision could affect large numbers of voters, while the Election Commission has defended the exercise as necessary for maintaining accurate electoral rolls.

The latest allegations concerning internal objections have added another layer to that dispute because they concern how decisions within the poll panel were made.

Key Points at a Glance

IssueCurrent PositionCECGyanesh KumarLatest demandDerek O’Brien seeks revival of removal motionPartyTrinamool CongressEarlier supportMore than 60 Rajya Sabha MPs cited by O’BrienConstitutional provisionArticle 324(5)Reported internal objectionsAt least 14, according to a media reportCommissioners namedSukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek JoshiEC positionSources say decisions were unanimousMajor related issueSpecial Intensive Revision of electoral rollsEarlier removal noticesRejected by presiding officers in April

What Happens Next?

The immediate question is whether the earlier removal motion will be taken up again or whether a fresh notice will be submitted.

The Election Commission's response to the reports about internal objections will also remain important, particularly if specific decisions or records are formally disclosed.

Meanwhile, the political dispute over SIR and the functioning of the Election Commission is expected to continue in Parliament and outside it.

Bottom Line

TMC Rajya Sabha leader Derek O’Brien has called for the revival of a motion seeking the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, following a report that two Election Commissioners had objected to several poll panel decisions during the SIR exercise. O’Brien said more than 60 Rajya Sabha MPs had earlier supported the motion.

Election Commission sources have disputed the suggestion of a formal split, maintaining that decisions, including those concerning SIR, were taken unanimously.

The earlier removal notices were rejected by the presiding officers of both Houses in April. Any renewed attempt to remove the CEC would therefore have to follow the constitutional and parliamentary procedure applicable to the office.