EC cited surge in CCTV requests to restrict access, but has no data to back claim
The Election Commission of India, which has defended its refusal to provide public access to CCTV footage from polling stations on grounds of voter privacy and administrative burden, has admitted under the Right to Information (RTI) Act that it possesses no data in any material form on the number of requests for such recordings received over the past five years.
In a response dated September 14, 2026, the commission told transparency activist Kanhaiya Kumar that it did not maintain the requested figures, even though it had cited an increase in demand for electoral video recordings as one of the reasons for tightening access regulations in December 2024, according to The Wire.
The disclosure has assumed significance amid the ongoing agitation against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the electoral process, particularly following Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s August allegations of irregularities and possible rigging in the voter list of Karnataka’s Mahadevapura Assembly constituency, and his demand that the Election Commission release CCTV footage from polling booths and VVPAT records.
The ECI maintained that aggrieved candidates could challenge election results before the relevant High Court within 45 days, and that footage would be preserved when an election petition was filed. Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar also invoked voter privacy, questioning whether recordings of voters, including women in their family roles, should be made publicly available.
However, the commission’s response to the RTI application has cast doubt on its earlier justification for restricting access. In December 2024, the Union government amended Rule 93(2)(a) of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, limiting public access to election-related documents to those explicitly specified in the rules.
The change followed a Punjab and Haryana High Court directive on December 10, 2024, ordering the disclosure of documents and recordings relating to the 2024 Haryana Assembly elections in a case brought by advocate Mehmood Pracha.
In proposing the amendment, the ECI argued that supplying electronic recordings required substantial manpower and imposed an impractical burden on election officials after polling. It also cited increasing requests for such material, although its latest RTI response offers no figures to substantiate that claim.
The commission’s own earlier instructions further complicate its position. A 2009 compendium of election guidelines acknowledged requests from candidates, political parties and other interested parties to inspect video recordings or obtain copies, and prescribed procedures for preserving, cataloguing and supplying the material.
The ECI subsequently reduced the retention period for electoral recordings. Under instructions issued on May 30, 2025, CCTV footage, videography and photographs were generally to be retained for 45 days after the declaration of results, after which they could be destroyed. The commission cited concerns that recordings were being taken out of context and used to spread misinformation and malicious propaganda.
The restrictions came despite a January 2025 Supreme Court direction to preserve polling-station video recordings securely during proceedings in a pending case.
Meanwhile, the Chandigarh mayoral election controversy of January 2024, in which CCTV footage exposed an official manipulating ballot counting. The Supreme Court subsequently set aside the result and declared AAP-Congress candidate Kuldeep Kumar the legitimately elected mayor.