Al Jazeera has long been infamous for its fact-deficient reporting on India, driven by propaganda that spreads misinformation and stokes tensions, especially during critical times in the country.
In its latest move, the Qatari-funded platform has cast aspersions not only on the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act 2023, but also on the appointment of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar on 12th October (Monday).
Al Jazeera has claimed Kumar was made the “election chief in 2025 under a law that gave the prime minister’s government greater influence over the appointment process, replacing the chief justice on the selection panel with a cabinet minister.”
The media house stated that Kumar is being pressed to resign over purported manipulation of voter lists. It then invoked The Indian Express report to allege that there are conflicts within the Election Commission of India (ECI), adding that “two of his deputies repeatedly raised concerns about voter-roll revisions and election procedures.” However, Kumar has dismissed the charges.
First and foremost, the President held the authority to appoint the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners before the 2023 Act. The sole recorded procedure involved the Law Ministry presenting a list of candidates to the Prime Minister, who then recommended one of them for the post to the President.
Notably, no selection panel or committee existed, and the opposition played no part in this procedure until the Act was introduced. On the other hand, heated disputes had regularly surfaced between the Congress-led governments and the electoral body as it repeatedly tried to undermine the latter’s authority through domineering tactics. Hence, the Modi government has brought transparency and inclusivity to the process.
Secondly, the development followed a Supreme Court order which stated, “We declare that the appointment of the chief election commissioner and the election commissioners shall be made on the recommendations made by a three-member committee comprising the prime minister, the leader of the opposition of the Lok Sabha and, in case no leader of the opposition is available, the leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha in terms of numerical strength and the chief justice of India.”
The apex court, however, conveyed that the Chief Justice of India’s participation would remain valid until Parliament passes relevant law in relation to the matter. The Modi government has merely adhered to the established directives.
Additionally, the Election Commission convened a press conference, which included Gyanesh Kumar and the two other election commissioners, where they announced that all decisions made by the electoral body have been “unanimous” and highlighted that the Supervision Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral roll was supported by the Supreme Court.
They further reaffirmed that the letter to the cabinet secretary concerned the work of an individual on deputation to the Election Commission rather than any policy problem, further refuting allegations of internal disagreements. Furthermore, it outlined how grievances over the voter lists are being addressed and also extended timelines for New Delhi and Maharashtra.
The Supreme Court has also refused to issue an immediate suspension order for Gyanesh Kumar in response to accusations that important SIR decisions were made unilaterally.
Most importantly, it has consistently upheld the program, even clarifying that it has not disapproved Form 6 used following the SIR in Bihar. The court had also expressed satisfaction with the Election Commission regarding its implementation, underscoring its significance in strengthening the democratic exercise.
It is abundantly clear that usual suspects such as Al Jazeera have joined the opposition’s chorus against the Election Commission and the Modi government, amplifying the baseless accusations, but the facts directly contradict the claims being disseminated by this ecosystem.
Al Jazeera’s long history of misleading narratives on India
Predictably, Al Jazeera, an integral part of the global Islamo-leftist network, has maintained a consistent record of utterly biased reporting on India. It engaged in a systematic campaign to undermine India’s global reputation by depicting it as a “third world nation” overextending its geopolitical influence during the consequential BRICS summit last month.
The media company, before targeting India’s diplomacy, had hit out at its democracy by raising questions about the West Bengal assembly election, characterising the outcome as a triumph of “hegemonic power” instead of the collective voice of the people, which transpired through the constitutional exercise.
The blatant Muslim appeasement of former chief minister Mamata Banerjee was likewise ignored, and the saffron party was attacked for alleged polarisation and Hindu majoritarianism. Al Jazeera made a brazen move to diminish the credibility of the elected government, while simultaneously ridiculing the will of the voters.
Moreover, the platform has persistently taken a Hinduphobic and anti-India position repeatedly. During the “I Love Muhammad” controversy, it resorted to showcasing Muslims as victims and held the entire country accountable instead of covering the violence committed by their preferred community.
Al Jazeera completely ignored the fact that Muslim youths intentionally desecrated Hindu religious posters during their Barawafaat procession in Uttar Pradesh and then ensued to create unrest in various parts of the nation after authorities took action against the accused, while conveniently focusing criticism on the state’s intervention to prevent further violence and chaos.
The outlet similarly justified the bloodthirsty Muslim mobs in Murshidabad that compelled numerous Hindus, including women and children, to abandon their homes for their safety, declaring the rioting as a result of “religious discrimination” and attacked Prime Minister Narendra Modi for the mayhem.
Hargobind Das and his son Chandan Das were lynched to death by the Islamists amidst the rampage as Hindu houses and businesses were destroyed, as death and rape threats were issued to the community members.
Al Jazeera released a propaganda documentary in 2023, after which an interim stay was placed on its telecast, broadcast or release by the Allahabad High Court in response to a petition. The hit job fundamentally asserted that the Muslim community in India is experiencing state-sanctioned discrimination and persecution.
While the media house was completely dedicated to demonising India and Hindus, it was simultaneously involved in whitewashing the heinous actions of its religious and ideological brethren in Bangladesh. It reframed communal violence as merely “politically-motivated” rather than acknowledging it as genuine hatred towards the minority community.
Al Jazeera chose to condemn Indian media for reporting these occurrences, arguing that such coverage of anti-Hindu violence constituted an Islamophobic and alarmist approach, wanting the victims to endure the brutality and pain in silence.
Unsurprisingly, the news agency has also served as an agent for Pakistani interests, which was especially apparent during “Operation Sindoor.” The media house’s correspondent Kamal Hyder cited Pakistani military sources to announce that Indian Air Force pilot Squadron Leader Shivani Singh was captured by the Pakistan Army after they shot down the Rafale fighter jet.
However, Pakistani forces had to clarify that no Indian pilots were in custody and dismissed these unfounded stories as unverified social media discourse.
Al Jazeera: The mouthpiece of Hamas
The jiahdi platform possesses not merely an extensive history of animosity directed toward India and Hindu populations, but equally toward Israel. Israel Defence Forces in 2024 exposed how its journalists were moonlighting as terrorists associated with Hamas and other such entities, based on intelligence information and documents uncovered in Gaza.
The IDF highlighted that this verified “the military affiliation of six Al Jazeera journalists in Gaza with Hamas and the Islamic Jihad terrorist organisations, including personnel tables, lists of terrorist training courses, phone directories, and salary documents for terrorists. These documents serve as proof of the integration of Hamas terrorists within the Qatari Al Jazeera media network.”
The Jewish government also terminated the media group’s operations following a unanimous cabinet decision, as the entity was deemed a threat to national security that same year. The outlet was termed a “mouthpiece of Hamas” by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He mentioned, “Al Jazeera’s journalists have harmed Israeli security and incited against IDF soldiers,” while communicating the development.
He shared similar sentiments a few months earlier, remarking that Al Jazeera not only provoked against the Israeli soldiers but also “harmed its security and actively participated in the 7th October massacre.” He added, “It is time to remove the shofar of Hamas from our country. The terrorist channel Al Jazeera will no longer broadcast from Israel,” while passing a law to temporarily ban the channel.
Noa Argamani, an Israeli citizen who was abducted along with her boyfriend during the Hamas-led October 2023 assault, was discovered at the residence of an Al Jazeera journalist. According to reports, Abdullah Al-Jamal, a journalist for Al Jazeera, was holding her at a civilian residence.
He was a staff writer for the United States publication The Palestine Chronicle and previously worked for Al Jazeera. He and his family members were killed in the rescue effort.
The Al Jalaa Building, which contained offices for Al Jazeera and other international media houses, was revealed to be utilised by Hamas, prompting its demolition. In the ultimate irony, the outlet had been awarded by Hamas for its purportedly “impartial coverage” during the conflict.
The prominent radical origins of Al Jazeera also include recognised connections with the Muslim Brotherhood and have broadcast messages from its late leader, Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Interestingly, a substantial rift appeared between Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Qatar as a consequence of its endorsement of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.
Saudi Arabia had demanded the shutdown of Al-Jazeera and its affiliates, accusing Qatar of using its propaganda arm to fund jihadi groups and foster terrorism.
Conclusion
Al Jazeera has an extensive history of glorifying terrorism, antagonism toward Hindus and anti-India propaganda. Therefore, the deceptive posts regarding Gyanesh Kumar and the Modi government are a continuation of a proactive pattern. This media house acts as an extension of an Islamist regime with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and relentlessly advances its agenda under the guise of endorsing democratic principles and minority rights, in a glaring hypocrisy hiding its true motivation behind the posturing.
Thus, it is perfectly natural for Al Jazeera to take part in this smear campaign along with the opposition, with propaganda taking centre stage while facts are pushed aside.
