 |
|
The Election Commission of India's (ECI) decision to conduct a 'Special Intensive Revision' (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, a mere four to six months before the upcoming assembly elections, has ignited a significant political debate. While the ECI defends its actions as necessary to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the voter list, opposition parties have raised concerns about potential manipulation and the timing of the revision, arguing that it could disproportionately affect certain sections of the population. To understand the current controversy, it is essential to examine the historical context of such revisions and the circumstances under which they have been carried out in the past. This article delves into previous instances of intensive electoral roll revisions in India, highlighting the similarities and differences between the current Bihar SIR and past practices, and analyzing the rationale behind the ECI's decision-making process. The article also assesses the potential impact of the revision on the upcoming elections and the broader political landscape of Bihar.
Historically, the ECI has conducted 'intensive' revisions of electoral rolls on multiple occasions, dating back to the early years of Indian democracy. From 1952 to 2004, at least nine such revisions were undertaken, often involving comprehensive house-to-house verification and, in some cases, the creation of entirely new electoral rolls ('de novo' exercise). These revisions were typically aimed at addressing issues such as voter registration errors, duplicate entries, and the inclusion of ineligible voters. However, the timing and scope of these revisions have varied considerably, depending on the specific circumstances prevailing in each state and the perceived need for electoral reform. The ECI has generally exercised caution in ordering full-scale intensive revisions shortly before elections, recognizing the potential for disruption and the risk of being accused of partisan motives. The current Bihar SIR stands out due to its proximity to the assembly elections, a factor that has fueled the controversy surrounding the revision. The decision to conduct an intensive revision so close to the polls raises questions about the ECI's rationale and the potential consequences for voter participation and the fairness of the electoral process. Examining past instances where the ECI opted against intensive revisions in the lead-up to elections provides valuable insights into the factors that typically influence such decisions.
For example, in June 2004, the ECI ordered an 'Intensive Revision of Electoral Rolls' in seven northeastern states and Jammu and Kashmir (J&K). Simultaneously, it initiated a 'special summary revision' in a much larger group of states and union territories, including Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Uttaranchal, West Bengal, and the Union Territories of Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Chandigarh, Daman & Diu, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, NCT of Delhi, Lakshadweep, and Pondicherry. Prior to this, in 2002 and 2003, 'intensive revision' of electoral rolls was carried out in 20 other states/UTs, including Bihar, but excluding the northeastern states and J&K. A crucial distinction between the current Bihar SIR and previous revisions lies in the methodology employed. While past 'intensive' revisions often involved a 'de novo' exercise, the Bihar SIR is using the 2002-03 electoral roll as a foundation. However, it also incorporates a new pre-printed enumeration form and requires document submission during house-to-house verification, aligning it with the characteristics of an 'intensive' revision. The timing of the Bihar SIR also sets it apart from previous exercises. The ECI has rarely ordered a full-state, full-scale intensive revision so close to scheduled assembly elections. The last intensive revision in Bihar occurred in 2002, three years before the assembly polls in October 2005. This difference in timing highlights the unusual nature of the current revision and raises questions about the ECI's motivations. The decision to proceed with such a comprehensive revision so close to the elections contrasts with the ECI's past practices, where it has often prioritized stability and avoided potentially disruptive interventions in the immediate pre-election period.
Further illustrating the ECI's cautious approach, in June 2004, when announcing intensive roll revisions in eight states, the ECI deliberately excluded Arunachal Pradesh and Maharashtra, where assembly polls were also due in October 2004. The ECI explained its decision by stating that the program in these two states would be announced after the completion of the elections. Instead, a 'special summary revision of rolls' was announced for Maharashtra ahead of the October 2024 assembly polls, including house-to-house enumeration, as per the September-December 2004 ECI newsletter. This example demonstrates the ECI's willingness to delay or modify its revision plans in order to avoid interfering with the electoral process. The decision to proceed with the Bihar SIR despite its proximity to the assembly elections raises questions about why the ECI did not adopt a similar approach in this case. The article should investigate the specific factors that led the ECI to deviate from its past practices and prioritize the intensive revision in Bihar, even at the risk of sparking political controversy. Moreover, the ECI has often opted for 'intensive' revisions in specific areas of a state, rather than across the entire state. In Tamil Nadu, following reports of 'shortcomings in the conduct of different levels of election officers at the time of intensive revision of electoral rolls in 2002,' the ECI ordered a 'special revision of intensive nature with house-to-house enumeration' in six municipal corporation areas across 33 constituencies in October 2004. Similarly, in the aftermath of the Gujarat riots, the ECI announced a repeat of the 2002 'special revision of intensive nature'.
Analyzing the potential consequences of the Bihar SIR is crucial to understanding its significance. The revision could lead to the deletion of ineligible voters, the correction of errors in voter registration, and the inclusion of eligible citizens who were previously not registered. However, it could also result in the disenfranchisement of legitimate voters, particularly those from marginalized communities who may lack the necessary documentation or face difficulties in navigating the revision process. The timing of the revision raises concerns that it could be used to manipulate the electoral rolls in favor of a particular political party or alliance. Opposition parties have alleged that the revision is intended to target voters who are perceived to be sympathetic to their cause. They have called for greater transparency in the revision process and have demanded that the ECI take steps to ensure that no eligible voter is unfairly excluded from the electoral rolls. The ECI has denied these allegations and has asserted that its sole objective is to ensure a fair and accurate electoral process. The ECI has emphasized that it is committed to conducting the revision in a transparent and impartial manner and that it will take all necessary measures to protect the rights of all voters. To ensure public trust and confidence in the electoral process, it is essential that the ECI addresses the concerns raised by opposition parties and civil society organizations and demonstrates its commitment to conducting the revision in a fair and equitable manner. The success of the Bihar SIR will depend not only on its technical accuracy but also on its perceived legitimacy and its ability to withstand political scrutiny. By conducting a thorough and impartial revision, the ECI can strengthen the integrity of the electoral process and enhance public trust in the democratic institutions of the country. However, a flawed or politically motivated revision could undermine public confidence and fuel further polarization in an already divided society. The ECI must therefore proceed with caution and ensure that its actions are guided by the principles of fairness, transparency, and impartiality.
Source: Rare 'intensive' revision in Bihar four months before polls