 |
|
The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, mandated by the Election Commission of India (ECI), is not merely an administrative update. It's a stark challenge to the very foundation of India's democratic principles, echoing historical instances of voter suppression and raising serious concerns about potential mass disenfranchisement. The core of the issue lies in the ECI's requirement for every voter in Bihar to submit fresh documentary proof of citizenship within a strict one-month timeframe. Failure to comply results in automatic removal from the electoral rolls. This unprecedented demand effectively reverses the constitutional principle of universal adult suffrage, a cornerstone of India's democracy championed by B.R. Ambedkar. Ambedkar envisioned suffrage as a universal right, not contingent upon education, economic status, or documentation. This vision is now under threat. The historical context further illuminates the gravity of the situation. During India’s first general elections, Election Commissioner Sukumar Sen implemented groundbreaking administrative innovations to ensure universal suffrage. Faced with the daunting task of enrolling 173 million voters, many of whom were illiterate, Sen introduced election symbols to make voting accessible to all. This inclusive approach stands in stark contrast to the current revision, which risks excluding individuals based on the availability and authenticity of documentation. The socio-economic realities in Bihar exacerbate the problem. A significant portion of the state's adult population, approximately 2.5 crore individuals, lack the documentary proof required by the ECI. Moreover, the ECI's refusal to accept commonly available documents like Aadhaar cards or ration cards, while demanding rare documents such as birth certificates or passports, creates a discriminatory barrier. Such stringent requirements disproportionately impact the poor, Dalit, Adivasi, and Bahujan communities, and women, further marginalizing those already vulnerable. This procedural shift bears a striking resemblance to voter suppression tactics employed under American Jim Crow laws, which systematically disenfranchised Black voters through literacy tests, poll taxes, and restrictive documentation requirements. Only significant judicial interventions, such as Reynolds v. Sims (1964) and the Voting Rights Act (1965), were able to dismantle these discriminatory practices. In the Indian context, judicial precedents reinforce the importance of procedural fairness in determining citizenship and voter rights. Supreme Court judgments in Md Rahim Ali vs State of Assam (2024) and Lal Babu Hussein & Others vs Electoral Registration Officer (1995) emphasize the need for transparency, natural justice, and the right to contest any disenfranchisement. These rulings assert that allegations or vague suspicions cannot justify excluding individuals from citizenship or voter lists without credible evidence and due process. The ECI’s recent practice, however, deviates from these judicial safeguards, mirroring the troubling experiences of Assam under the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and National Register of Citizens (NRC). The “D-voter” (doubtful voter) classification in Assam led to immense suffering, thrusting thousands into Foreigners Tribunals, where procedural biases and failures resulted in the stripping of citizenship rights and statelessness. This bureaucratic nightmare highlighted the devastating human consequences of aggressive administrative practices lacking adequate constitutional protections. The exercise in Bihar risks replicating these alarming precedents. As Yogendra Yadav points out, the current move shifts the burden of proof from the state to vulnerable individuals who, facing extreme socio-economic challenges, must now demonstrate their citizenship status. Given Bihar’s pervasive poverty, susceptibility to floods, and limited administrative infrastructure, the ECI's abrupt and inflexible timeline intensifies exclusion. Demanding comprehensive documentation compliance within one month during the monsoon season is inherently discriminatory against marginalized communities who lack easy access to administrative resources. The spirit of universal suffrage, as highlighted by historian Ornit Shani’s research, underscores the importance of collective democratic imagination and a radical departure from colonial electoral practices. Bureaucrats, under Sukumar Sen’s leadership, were trained to recognize every adult Indian as a citizen and voter, transforming administrative structures to support democratic equality. The original electoral roll preparation before India’s first elections involved active engagement with grassroots activism and open communication with citizens to address and correct exclusionary practices. This included a flexible and humanitarian interpretation of citizenship, particularly in addressing the needs of refugees and displaced persons following Partition. Shani argues that democracy, especially universal franchise, required imagination beyond mere ideology. Indian officials and citizens collectively shaped the conceptualization and realization of universal suffrage. This democratic experiment fundamentally transformed bureaucratic mindsets, shifting from colonial perspectives to envisioning every adult as a potential voter and citizen. These inclusive administrative innovations, rooted in a nuanced understanding of procedural equality, democratized not just the electoral rolls but also the bureaucratic mindset and national imagination.
Contrasting sharply with this historical inclusivity, the current revision risks undermining the very democratic ethos upon which India’s electoral system was established. The Election Commission's primary responsibility is to conduct free and fair elections involving all citizens. This mandate necessitates a presumption of citizenship, not exclusion. Elections are the lifeblood of a democratic nation, not an exclusive membership club limited to those who can provide extensive documentation. The imposition of stringent documentation requirements creates a system that inherently disadvantages those who are already marginalized and vulnerable. It transforms the act of voting, a fundamental right, into a privilege accessible only to those with the resources and ability to navigate complex bureaucratic processes. This creates a two-tiered system of citizenship, where some individuals are afforded the full rights and protections of citizenship, while others are relegated to a second-class status. This contradicts the principles of equality and justice that underpin India's Constitution. The potential consequences of this disenfranchisement extend far beyond the immediate impact on individual voters. When large segments of the population are excluded from the electoral process, it undermines the legitimacy and representativeness of the government. It can lead to policies that disproportionately benefit certain groups while neglecting the needs of others. It can also fuel social unrest and instability, as those who are denied a voice in the political process may resort to other means of expressing their grievances. The erosion of democratic rights is a slippery slope. Once the principle of universal suffrage is compromised, it becomes easier to justify further restrictions on voting rights and other fundamental freedoms. This can lead to a gradual erosion of democracy and a concentration of power in the hands of a select few. It is therefore essential to resist any attempts to undermine the principles of universal suffrage and to protect the rights of all citizens to participate fully in the democratic process. The reliance on documentary proof as the sole determinant of citizenship is particularly problematic in a country like India, where many people lack access to formal documentation. This is especially true in rural areas and among marginalized communities, where literacy rates are low and access to government services is limited. The ECI's insistence on specific types of documents, such as birth certificates and passports, further exacerbates the problem. These documents are often difficult to obtain, particularly for those who were born before the widespread adoption of formal registration systems. The rejection of commonly available documents, such as Aadhaar cards and ration cards, is also unreasonable. These documents are widely used for identification and are often required for accessing government services. To deny their validity as proof of citizenship is to create an unnecessary barrier for many people. The ECI's decision to conduct this revision during the monsoon season is also questionable. The monsoon season is a time of heavy rainfall and flooding in many parts of Bihar, making it difficult for people to travel and access government services. The one-month timeframe for submitting documentation is also unrealistic, given the challenges faced by many people in obtaining the necessary documents. A more reasonable and equitable approach would be to extend the timeframe and to provide assistance to those who are struggling to obtain the required documentation. It would also be helpful to accept a wider range of documents as proof of citizenship, including those that are commonly available and easily accessible.
In stark opposition to the progressive electoral policies and inclusive vision of Ambedkar and Sen, the Special Intensive Revision in Bihar under Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar represents a regressive turn, undermining decades of democratic institution-building. The ECI's current approach is a betrayal of the principles of universal suffrage and democratic equality. It is a step backward that threatens to erode the foundations of India's democracy. By potentially stripping millions of their fundamental voting rights, it threatens the integrity of India’s democracy. The historical lessons from voter suppression, both Indian and American, highlight the urgent need to protect democratic rights. This situation demands immediate attention and action. Judicial and legislative oversight is imperative to ensure that the ECI's actions are in accordance with the Constitution and that the rights of all citizens are protected. The judiciary must be vigilant in upholding the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. It must ensure that those who are threatened with disenfranchisement have the opportunity to challenge the ECI's decisions and to present evidence in their defense. The legislature must also take action to ensure that the ECI's powers are properly circumscribed and that there are adequate safeguards in place to prevent voter suppression. This could include amending the electoral laws to clarify the requirements for voter registration and to prohibit the use of discriminatory practices. Civil society organizations and concerned citizens also have a crucial role to play in raising awareness about this issue and in advocating for the protection of democratic rights. It is essential to mobilize public opinion and to put pressure on the government and the ECI to ensure that the rights of all citizens are respected. The essence of India’s democracy hinges upon upholding constitutional guarantees and ensuring electoral processes remain transparent, inclusive, and just. The current situation in Bihar is a test of India's commitment to these principles. It is a moment that will determine whether India continues to uphold its democratic ideals or succumbs to the forces of exclusion and disenfranchisement. The future of India's democracy depends on the actions that are taken now to protect the rights of all citizens to participate fully in the electoral process. The time for complacency is over. It is time for action to ensure that India remains a beacon of democracy in the world. The focus should be on facilitating voter participation, not creating obstacles. This requires a shift in mindset from a focus on administrative efficiency to a focus on ensuring that all eligible citizens have the opportunity to exercise their right to vote. It also requires a commitment to transparency and accountability. The ECI must be open and transparent about its procedures and decision-making processes. It must also be held accountable for any actions that undermine the principles of universal suffrage. The challenges facing India's democracy are significant, but they are not insurmountable. By working together, we can protect the rights of all citizens and ensure that India remains a vibrant and thriving democracy for generations to come. The current electoral revision in Bihar serves as a crucial reminder of the fragility of democratic institutions and the constant need for vigilance in safeguarding fundamental rights. The lessons learned from this experience must be applied to future electoral processes to prevent similar situations from arising and to ensure that the principles of universal suffrage and democratic equality are upheld throughout the country.
Source: Bihar electoral rolls revision: Elections aren't for an exclusive club