Global perspective. Clear attribution. Updated throughout the day.
Live desk Concise briefs from trusted publishers · Always follow the source for the full report
Markets
GBP/USD 1.3254 FrankfurterEUR/USD 1.1398 FrankfurterUSD/NGN 1,327.68 FrankfurterUSD/JPY 158.25 FrankfurterGold $4,286.20/oz Gold APISilver $64.42/oz Gold API
Breaking
Lagos traffic becomes unexpected audience for creative industry, deputy governor says Punch NigeriaOgogo’s daughters endorse Yayi at Ogun community exercise Punch NigeriaNaval chief charges 135 new officers to stay ready for complex threats Punch NigeriaYamal says enjoyment, not statistics or money, drives his football Punch NigeriaTinubu congratulates Bishop Oyedepo on 72nd birthday Punch NigeriaOrange Order march proceeds through Portadown’s Garvaghy Road after court ruling The Guardian UKLabour leads Reform in new election projection as conference opens The Guardian UKBangkok flood victims seek supplies as Thai prime minister cuts UK trip short South China Morning PostTwo men die after suspected chemical leak in Mumbai public toilet The HinduModi calls 2016 surgical strikes a decisive model of counter-terrorism The Hindu
Scores
Monterey Bay FC v Lexington SC 2–3 American USL Championship · TheSportsDBNew Mexico United v Sacramento Republic 2–3 American USL Championship · TheSportsDBOakland Roots v Phoenix Rising 3–0 American USL Championship · TheSportsDB
Politics

India’s law sets a high bar for removing the chief election commissioner

Source: The Hindu · 27 Sep 2026, 06:03 UTC
India’s law sets a high bar for removing the chief election commissioner
Image: The Hindu · original report

India’s Constitution allows the Chief Election Commissioner to be removed only through the parliamentary process used for removing a Supreme Court judge, on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The issue has gained attention after Opposition parties sought the removal of CEC Gyanesh Kumar following reported disagreements within the Election Commission.

India’s Chief Election Commissioner can be removed only through a demanding parliamentary process, with the Constitution giving the office stronger protection than that available to other Election Commissioners. The issue has come under scrutiny after Opposition parties on September 23 sought the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. Their demand followed an Indian Express report claiming that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had formally recorded objections at least 14 times over the previous 10 months.

Article 324(5) of the Constitution says the CEC may be removed from office in the same manner and on the same grounds as a Supreme Court judge. Removal therefore requires proved misbehaviour or incapacity, followed by passage of a motion with the required special majority in both Houses of Parliament. The President may issue the removal order only after Parliament passes the motion.

The procedure is set out in the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. By contrast, an Election Commissioner or Regional Commissioner cannot be removed except on the recommendation of the CEC. The Constitution also provides the framework for appointing the Election Commission.

Parliament enacted the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which took effect in January 2024. Under that law, a selection committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister recommends appointments to the President. A search committee led by the Union Law Minister prepares a panel of five people for consideration.

The law has been challenged in the Supreme Court because its selection mechanism replaces the Chief Justice of India with a Union Cabinet Minister. On September 23, a Division Bench delivered a split decision on whether the challenge should be referred to a larger bench. Section 16 of the 2023 Act protects current and former election commissioners from civil or criminal proceedings for acts or words undertaken in the course of official duties.

The provision does not expressly mention arrest, investigation or police custody, and therefore cannot simply be described as blanket immunity from arrest.

About this report
This independently written report is based on information supplied by the named publisher. Vertrix News has not independently verified the source report.
View the original source at The Hindu →