While the observations are indeed welcome, one cannot be oblivious of the fact that the court was approached several times after the EC announced its plan and programmes for the SIR in Bihar in July last year pointing to the undemocratic character of the process. — DC Image

Finally, the cries for justice by crores of voters, lakhs of youngsters and the whole lot of Opposition parties with regard to the unjust, illegal, unconstitutional and undemocratic way the Election Commission (EC) rolled out the special intensive revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls across the country appear to have reached the gates of the Supreme Court, going by the comments the court made on Wednesday reflecting the very same concerns the protesters have been making for more than a year. Had the court acted in a similar manner earlier, the unprecedented episodes that caused unearned suffering for the defenders of democracy could have been avoided, and the elections held during this period would have more accurately reflected the people’s choice for their rulers.

While hearing the petitions against SIR in Delhi, the apex court bench headed by the Chief Justice sought some clarifications from the EC. It wanted to know the logic behind removing people on the voters’ list just because they were not contacted. The queries included how Form 6 can be tweaked beyond the mandate of the law. It made some cryptic comments on the right to vote, saying it is vital and cannot be forfeited in the case of even a single voter. It even directed the EC to devise a mechanism to reach out to 47 lakhs of 1.45 crore Delhi voters whose names have been struck out in the draft electoral list during the ongoing voter list revision.

The apex court questioned the poll panel on the requirement for previously enrolled voters, whose names are omitted from the draft rolls, to file Form 6, which is meant for first-time enrolment to seek inclusion. It asked the poll panel not to fix the deadline and accept enumeration forms from deleted voters instead of asking them to fill Forms 6, 7 and 8. And to top it all, the apex court made it clear to the EC that it has not yet adjudicated on the legality of “logical discrepancy”, the poll panel’s invention that deprived crores of voters of their constitutional right during SIR.

The court, interestingly, did not agree with the EC which pointed out that most of its actions had the consent of the court saying that they were all interim arrangements. In short, the court has put all the actions of the EC which are suspect in the eyes of right-thinking people in the country open for adjudication.

While the observations are indeed welcome, one cannot be oblivious of the fact that the court was approached several times after the EC announced its plan and programmes for the SIR in Bihar in July last year pointing to the undemocratic character of the process. It cannot also be denied that the court made sympathetic references to the demands of the petitioners but the orders never stopped the poll panel from going ahead with the flawed process. Most poignant was the election to the West Bengal Assembly where, as per the EC’s own admission, 22 lakh voters have petitioned the court appointed tribunals against their disenfranchisement and inability to vote.

The SC will do the republic and its Constitution a favour if stands by the inviolability of the right to vote, scrap the ongoing SIR and start the process afresh. It also needs to make the EC and the men and women who run it accountable for the grave assault that they have made on the country’s democratic body politic.

Tags: