Indian opposition MPs detained in protest against election chief

Opposition members of parliament were detained during a demonstration outside the Election Commission headquarters, according to Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police Manjeet Sheoran, who told the BBC, "Some of the MPs tried to instrumentality immoderate different roads to the Election Commission building. We person officers stationed astatine aggregate points, from wherever the protesters were picked up successful buses and taken to antithetic constabulary stations," while police did not disclose the exact number of lawmakers taken into custody. The protest saw 237 MPs from a range of parties participating in the march. The demonstration occurred just four days after the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), a Gen Z‑backed online satirical movement, organised rallies in Mumbai and Delhi, also calling for the resignation of the Chief Election Commissioner. The group has labelled those actions the opening of a nationwide campaign and has announced further protests scheduled for 10 October. At the heart of the dispute lies the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The exercise commenced in June 2025 in the eastern state of Bihar before being rolled out to other regions. The Commission states the revision aims to eliminate duplicate and ineligible voters from the rolls, noting that more than 130 cardinal names have so far been removed from draft voter lists across the country. Opposition parties and activists contend that numerous eligible voters have been wrongly excised and accuse the electoral body of administering the process improperly. Momentum behind the criticism of Commissioner Kumar increased after an investigation by the Indian Express reported that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had formally objected at least 14 times over a ten‑month period to decisions and orders they claimed were issued in the Commission’s name without their awareness. According to the report, the objections concerned additions and deletions to voter rolls, access to the voter database, and the security of electoral data, with some directly tied to the SIR programme. The Election Commission, a three‑member body comprising the Chief Election Commissioner and two Election Commissioners, defended its decision‑making, asserting that differing viewpoints are part of institutional functioning and that all choices had ultimately been reached unanimously. Nevertheless, the revelations provoked a political backlash, with opposition leaders intensifying their demands for Kumar’s resignation.