Indian protests demand election chief’s resignation over voter-roll revision
publishers 25articles 38first reported 2 Oct, 07:02 UTCdeveloping since 2 Oct · 20 editions
Thousands of protesters rallied in Mumbai and New Delhi for a third consecutive day on Sunday, demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over a nationwide revision of India’s electoral rolls.
The demonstrations began Friday, led in part by the youth-backed Cockroach Janta Party, after reports raised questions about the Special Intensive Revision overseen by Kumar. Protesters and opposition parties allege that the process has removed millions of eligible voters and could benefit Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party. The Election Commission and the BJP deny those allegations. The commission says the revision is intended to remove duplicate, deceased and ineligible entries, and on Friday instructed officials to restore eligible voters omitted inadvertently.
In Mumbai, opposition leaders Raj Thackeray and Uddhav Thackeray led a Sunday march calling for the revision to be scrapped. In Delhi, police detained demonstrators as they gathered; some protesters breached barricades and blocked vehicles carrying detainees. Scroll.in reported that at least 700 people were detained during Friday’s Delhi protest, while the Mumbai demonstration drew thousands despite police refusing permission for the gathering.
Delhi police also ordered an investigation after three women journalists alleged officers sexually harassed them while they covered the protests, Deutsche Welle reported.
Further demonstrations are planned. Opposition INDIA bloc parties have announced marches and protests at election offices, while the Cockroach Janta Party plans a major New Delhi rally on October 10. Kumar has not publicly addressed demands that he resign.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 8 articles, 6 with the publisher's own text; 7 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written 60 h after the record first saw the story; the editor kept it as written.
- Publishers
- 25
- Source articles
- 38
- Given to the writer
- 8, 6 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 7
- This version written
- 60 h after the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- kept as written
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
WHAT THE EDITOR DID
The second model checked the writer's draft against the same sources and published it as written.
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →