checkthis / Fact check
Half the storyThe Reel accurately reports internal dissent among Election Commissioners and software glitches affecting voter lists. However, it frames these administrative failures as a deliberate, unauthorized effort to disenfranchise voters.
What we checked
≈
It implies: The centralization of the ECI Net software is intentionally designed to override local election officers and disenfranchise specific voters.The Hindu
✓
The SIR has struck 13 crore names off the electoral rolls across 30 states and union territories.Alt News
✓
Sandhu and Joshi have been writing notes for 10 months saying they weren't told about decisions taken in the commission's name.Alt News
✓
In Goa, 97 people struck off the rolls remained missing from the final list despite local officers wanting them reinstated.Newslaundry
✓
In West Bengal, 16 lakh appeals were filed against the inclusion of 33 lakh voters reinstated by judicial officers.The Wire
?
Sukhbir Singh Sandhu stated on file that he did not know who filed the 16 lakh appeals in West Bengal.No reliable source found for this yet.
What the Reel doesn't tell you
- The 97 voters in Goa were left off the final roll because the software lacked a mechanism to record ERO decisions, rather than due to a deliberate plot.
What each side says
Election Commission of IndiaThe ECI asserts that all decisions over the past year, including the SIR, were made unanimously by the full commission. Times of India
Election Commission of IndiaThe ECI stated that the objections raised by the two commissioners were standard administrative inputs limited to the draft stages of decision-making. Times of India
Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek JoshiSandhu and Joshi objected to the alteration of Form 6, calling it unauthorized and illegal without formal rule amendments. The Hindu
How it plays you
It wants you to think: "The Election Commission is intentionally using centralized software to rig voter rolls and bypass legal safeguards."
Internal administrative disagreements and software technical flaws—such as lacking a rollback mechanism for 97 Goa voters—do not establish a deliberate, unauthorized conspiracy to manipulate elections.
- Loaded language: "under fire like never before". Uses dramatic phrasing to amplify ordinary administrative and procedural disagreements into an unprecedented institutional crisis.
- Insinuation by question: "who decides it's there". Leaves the viewer with an ominous, unsupported doubt about voter roll legitimacy after detailing technical glitches.
Does this look wrong?
Check a Reel yourself
Send any Reel to @checkthis.chat on Instagram. You get a reply like this in a minute or two.
Send a Reel