{
  "id": 9761322,
  "title": "When former CEC TN Seshan took on politicians",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/09/25/when-former-cec-tn-seshan-took-on-politicians",
  "topic": "world",
  "section": "World",
  "published": "2026-09-25T11:51:41.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "The Economic Times",
    "slug": "the-economic-times",
    "url": "https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/new-updates/i-eat-politicians-for-breakfast-tn-seshans-famous-words-are-back-amid-sir-controversy-when-the-former-cec-challenged-the-centre-fought-ec-power-battle/articleshow/134483940.cms"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "Former Chief Election Commissioner TN Seshan, famous for his blunt comment \"I eat politicians for breakfast,\" returned to public attention due to the recent controversy surrounding the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) procedure. Reports in The Indian Express revealed disagreements within the poll body over SIR-related decisions, including matters of voter deletions and electoral roll data. These disputes echo Seshan's earlier struggles with politicians during his tenure from December 1990 to December 1996.\n\nTN Seshan, India's 10th Chief Election Commissioner, was renowned for his commitment to enforcing the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and asserting the Election Commission's constitutional powers. His tenure coincided with a significant transformation in the ECI's structure, as the government converted it into a multi-member body by appointing two additional Election Commissioners in October 1993. Seshan challenged this move in the Supreme Court, arguing that it diluted his authority. The government, however, maintained that the Constitution allowed for a multi-member ECI.\n\nThe Seshan vs Election Commissioners case in 1993 was not just a constitutional dispute, but also a personal one. The Supreme Court's judgment in 1995 upheld the law providing for a multi-member ECI and the appointments of new commissioners, while rejecting Seshan's claim that his opinion should override others. This ruling established an essential principle for the functioning of a multi-member ECI: the Chief Election Commissioner's view is not superior to that of the other commissioners. The court hoped for mutual respect and collaboration among the commissioners instead.",
  "summary": null,
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}