Exclusion errors: ECI must ensure genuine voters are not left out

With the Supreme Court terming its special intensive revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar as its “constitutional mandate”, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has indicated plans to carry out the exercise across the country. It is likely to wait until July 28, the next date of hearing on the sundry petitions filed against the exercise underway in Bihar, before pressing ahead. But questions over the ECI enlarging its sphere of responsibility, including deciding on such issues as citizenship, and stepping away from its earlier motto of “no voter is left behind” by shifting the onus of being on the voters’ list from the state to the citizens, remain unanswered. 

On Sunday, ECI officials claimed that booth-level officers (BLOs), its field-level functionaries, had found “a very large number of people” from Nepal, Bangladesh, and Myanmar during their house-to-house visits as part of the SIR in Bihar. Questions have been asked as to the basis on which BLOs are determining “foreign” origins. The ECI does not have the jurisdiction to decide issues of citizenship and that also by a block-level officer. Apart from Bihar, which goes to the polls in October-November, four states and a Union Territory — Assam, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Puducherry — are scheduled to have elections next year. At least in two of these, namely Assam and West Bengal, the issue of illegal immigration has been politically volatile.   

Ever since it was set up, and without a definitive proof of citizenship issued under the Citizenship Act, the ECI has done a commendable job in preparing inclusive electoral rolls, which have expanded from about 180 million electors in 1951 to soon reach a billion. In its petition in the Supreme Court, the Association for Democratic Reforms questioned SIR’s unreasonable and impractical timeline in Bihar since it is being carried out in close proximity to the state elections. It argued that there were millions whose names did not appear in the 2003 revision — people who either did not possess the documents as required under the SIR order or might find it difficult to procure such documents, given the short timeline. The petitions also flagged the ECI excluding identification documents such as Aadhaar, electoral photo identity card, or ration cards, adding to the threat of exclusion to the marginalised. The Supreme Court has suggested the use of these documents, which the ECI must adhere to. 

It is worth noting that Bihar has one of the country’s worst literacy rates. According to the National Family Health Survey-5, 40 per cent of women of reproductive age have never been to school. According to the 2011 Census, 29 per cent of men in Bihar could not read a form. More than half of Bihar’s households have one earning member who is a migrant, and 47 per cent of Bihar’s voters are under 40, most of whom would find it difficult to procure and submit in time one of the 11 documents. The ECI has claimed that more than 80 per cent of the state’s voters have been covered under SIR, but it is unclear how many of them are migrants, who usually return to Bihar in the runup to the elections to cast their vote. Given the fact that questions are being raised on the ECI’s functioning, the poll panel would do well to not just conform to the letter but also the spirit of India’s inclusive democracy.