ECI CCTV footage: RTI reply gives no data for the demand it cited
Published
The Election Commission limited access to polling-station footage citing overwhelming demand. Its RTI reply holds no record of that demand, and the footage is kept for just 45 days after results.
Original report
The Election Commission of India (ECI) has cited "overwhelming demand" as the reason for limiting access to polling-station CCTV and webcast footage, yet its reply to a Right to Information (RTI) request, dated 14 September 2026, gave no data showing any surge in requests (Madhyamam, 2026). The Wire reported that the commission admits it holds no records of such requests (The Wire, 2026).
That gap matters because the footage is an independent record of what happened inside a polling station. Public inspection of it was curbed by a rule change in December 2024, and the footage is kept for only 45 days after results (The Tribune, 2024; Madhyamam, 2026).
The RTI reply has no count of requests
The reply gave no figures for the demand the ECI cited, Madhyamam reported (Madhyamam, 2026). That means the commission holds no tally of requests. It does not show that nobody asked.
The point cuts both ways. The ECI's stated reason cannot be checked against its own records, and nobody can claim from this reply that demand was zero.
The reason itself rests on a rule changed two years earlier.
The 2024 rule change closed public inspection
In December 2024 the Law Ministry amended Rule 93 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, curbing public inspection of CCTV, webcast and video records, The Tribune reported (The Tribune, 2024). The Tribune said a Punjab and Haryana High Court ruling triggered the change.
Two reasons have been given: the manpower needed to handle requests (Madhyamam, 2026) and the secrecy of the vote (The Tribune, 2024). Congress leader Jairam Ramesh said at the time: "This move of the ECI will be challenged legally right away" (The Tribune, 2024).
Not everyone lost access, though.
Questions people are asking
Can a candidate still get polling-station CCTV footage?
Yes. Candidates keep access to electronic records under the amended rule, The Tribune reported (The Tribune, 2024). The reports we read do not say how a candidate applies.
How long is election CCTV footage kept?
For 45 days after results, under instructions dated 30 May 2025, Madhyamam reported (Madhyamam, 2026).
Does the RTI reply show zero requests?
No. It shows the ECI holds no data on requests, not that none were made (The Wire, 2026; Madhyamam, 2026).
How the coverage split
The three reports we read put the weight in different places. The Wire led on the contrast between "overwhelming demand" and zero records (The Wire, 2026). Madhyamam focused on the missing data behind the surge claim (Madhyamam, 2026). The Tribune, writing in 2024, reported the rule change and its curb on public inspection (The Tribune, 2024).
What we don't know yet
- The full text of the RTI reply, and who filed the request.
- The exact wording of Rule 93(2)(a) after the amendment.
- How a candidate applies for footage, and by when.
No hearing or deadline on the footage rules was dated in the reports we read. The same commission is also running a special summary revision of voter rolls in 17 states and Union Territories, with draft rolls due on 12 November.
References
- The Wire (2026) ECI restricts electoral CCTV access citing overwhelming demand but admits zero records in RTI. The Wire. Available at: ECI restricts electoral CCTV access citing overwhelming demand but admits zero records in RTI (Accessed: 18 October 2026).
- Madhyamam (2026) EC cited surge in CCTV requests to restrict access, but has no data to back claim. Madhyamam. Available at: EC cited surge in CCTV requests to restrict access, but has no data to back claim (Accessed: 18 October 2026).
- The Tribune (2024) Election rules tweaked to restrict public inspection of electronic records. The Tribune. Available at: Election rules tweaked to restrict public inspection of electronic records (Accessed: 18 October 2026).
How we did this
We compared three reports on the ECI's footage rules, from The Wire, Madhyamam and The Tribune, published between December 2024 and October 2026, and built a timeline from their dates: the rule change, the 45-day retention instruction and the RTI reply. We could not read the RTI reply or the amended rule ourselves, and The Wire's page returned only its headline, so its findings here come from that headline.
This story was produced, reviewed, edited and verified by the reporter before publication, with AI assistance where required.
Covered by 3 outlets across the spectrum: 67% left, 33% center, 0% right.
Who is covering this story
- Left-leaning (2): Madhyamam, The Wire
- Center (1): Tribune India