DC Edit | ECI Has To Revisit Its ‘Logic’ Behind West Bengal SIR

It is matter of great concern that the special intensive revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls by the Election Commission of India is putting bonafide voters through such difficulty as to warrant the intervention of the Supreme Court of India to ensure that the exercise does not end up in denying them the right to exercise their franchise which is so elementary and critical in a democracy.

The latest such instance is in fact the court’s directive to the ECI to display the names of those on its “logical discrepancies” list at gram panchayat bhavans and block offices of talukas and ward offices in West Bengal. The court has also instructed the ECI that those likely to be affected by the exercise are to be allowed to submit their documents or objections at the panchayat bhavans and block offices.

The ECI has come out with the term “logical discrepancies” that has resulted in the dropping of the names of a whopping 1.25 crore voters in the state as there are mismatches while linking the progeny of voters on the 2002 voters’ list. Different spellings were cited as the reasons for dropping some while notices were also sent on the grounds that the age difference with the parent was less than 15 years or more than 50 years. The “logic” behind the “logical discrepancies”, however, failed to convince the court which wondered how a 15-year age gap between mother and son can be a logical discrepancy “as if we don’t have child marriages in this country”.

The ECI’s response, however, was not in a way that can inspire confidence in the minds of the people. Its obstinate “if the ECI is to be distrusted, let the ECI not hold the elections at all” reeked of contempt for democratic rights and norms, as if the poll body had all the rights and liberties to play with the voting rights of the people. The fact is that none other than the EC has been distrusting itself — the whole exercise has its genesis in the distrust it has in the electoral rolls it had prepared based on which the Lok Sabha and the state Assemblies were elected. Yet it continued to come up with one weird argument after another justifying its untenable positions.

The poll panel would do well to remember what the apex court had originally suggested when it started the SIR in Bihar: Let it be an inclusive exercise, and not an exclusive one. No party or individual has complained about its authority in cleaning up the electoral rolls but its refusal to take responsibility for its own actions cannot pass. Instead of explaining why a name which is on the poll roll must be dropped, it asked the citizens to prove their case for being there, forcing one to question the logic behind the entire exercise.

Fortunately for the citizens, that has failed to impress the apex court. The poll panel should at least now come down from the pedestal on which it has placed itself, understand its responsibility to the citizens and do its job in a smooth fashion without inconveniencing the population, made up of the self-same voters who elect this country’s rulers.