New Delhi: The Election Commission of India has declined to disclose the name and version of the software used to detect errors and anomalies in electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR). In reply to a Right to Information (RTI) application, it said the information relates to commercial confidence, trade secrets, and intellectual property rights.

What the RTI asked and what the EC said

The application, dated July 27, was filed by Telangana social activist M.A. Mujeeb Ayyub. It sought the software, application, algorithm or AI platform used to identify errors, anomalies or inconsistencies in the rolls. In its October 16 reply, the Commission invoked Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act and refused.

The same reply also said that no new software had been developed or procured for the SIR. It added that Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) decide whether to include or exclude an elector on the basis of facts and records. An EC official said software and algorithm details are conventionally not shared under RTI. A former chief election commissioner has reportedly suggested the applicant appeal.

What Section 8(1)(d) allows

The exemption covers commercial confidence, trade secrets and intellectual property, where disclosure would harm a third party’s competitive position. It carries a public-interest override: the authority can still release the information if it is satisfied that a larger public interest warrants disclosure. Applicants can appeal to the first appellate authority and then to the Central Information Commission.

Not the first refusal

In September, Trinamool Congress leader Saket Gokhale cited another RTI reply, dated July 21, in which the Commission used the same exemption. He asked which company’s commercial interests were being protected. He also pointed out that the same reply said no module had been developed specifically for the SIR in West Bengal.

The tension critics point to

The Commission says it didn't develop new software for the SIR, yet it won’t name the software that flags errors. Critics argue those two positions are hard to square, and that a tool influencing who stays on the voter list is a matter of public interest. The Commission says officers make the final decisions, and that the Supreme Court upheld the SIR in May, subject to safeguards: notice, a hearing, a reasoned order, and appeal.

A wider transparency row

The refusal comes amid a political fight over the SIR and the Commission’s ECINET platform, which integrates more than 40 of its apps.

• The Congress and other opposition parties have demanded Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation. This followed a report that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had raised objections repeatedly. The Commission said all decisions, including those on SIR, were unanimous. The BJP defended the Commission’s internal deliberations.
• Opposition parties have approached the Supreme Court seeking suspension of the SIR, disclosure of the Commission’s files and an independent audit.
• The Commission has described ECINET as decentralised and proposed a committee, including an independent expert from an IIT or IIIT, to check that it complies with the law. Opposition leaders called an earlier press note a “damage control” attempt that hides all and reveals nothing.
• A digital-rights group has filed its own RTI applications seeking contracts, data practices and security audits for ECINET, the BLO app and related tools.
• In July, an EC official told UN Special Rapporteurs that no artificial intelligence is used at any stage.

What to watch

The key questions are whether the applicant appeals, and whether the Commission or a court finds a public-interest case for disclosure. The SIR is under Supreme Court scrutiny, so the software question may reach the bench.
 

© Copyright 2026. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Vygr Media.