DC Edit | As Mamata Steps In, Will SC Protect Voters In SIR?
Ms Banerjee’s case is simple: All bona fide voters must find a place on the rolls and it is the responsibility of the Election Commission to ensure that
Shorn of its dramatic potential and historic aspect, the appearance of West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee in the Supreme Court of India in person to plead the case of the people of West Bengal against the unjust, illegal and unconstitutional deletion of voters from the electoral roll by the Election Commission of India as part of the special intensive revision points to an urgent need for the apex court to intervene in the matter.
Ms Banerjee’s case is simple: All bona fide voters must find a place on the rolls and it is the responsibility of the Election Commission to ensure that. West Bengal’s electoral roll had 7.66 crore entries before the SIR. The ECI published a draft list after deleting 58 lakh names and flagged 1.16 crore entries as having “logical discrepancies”. This is, however, just an expression to cover up its failure to factor Indian realities in the exercise. Using this clumsy expression, the ECI has effectively stripped the people of West Bengal of their right to elect their rulers. This right is the cornerstone of democracy as practised in our country.
India is a multilingual society. The Eighth Schedule of the Constitution lists 22 languages, and discrepancies and unavoidable errors could take place when proper nouns are written in different languages. There are men and women with an age gap of fewer than 15 years or over 50 years with their parents. Sometimes, couples may have six or more children. Many women adopt their husband’s name as their last name. These are realities of Indian life and not “logical discrepancies” powerful enough to strike names off the electoral roll.
It may be recalled that the Supreme Court itself had flagged these issues and expressed its disapproval for using them as excuses to remove names from the voter list. The West Bengal CM’s case is that the Election Commission refuses to address her queries on these issues and hence her appearance in person before the court. It is welcome that the apex court has asked the ECI to be more sensitive going ahead.
The points argued by Ms Banerjee, at the same time, ask us to prioritise an issue that is fundamental to the functioning of our country as a democracy. Article 21 of the Constitution insists that “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except by procedure established by law”. The right to life is fundamental to the existence of the citizen as an individual. Likewise, the right to exercise their franchise is fundamental to them as citizens of the republic. Hence it must be treated on a par with the right to life, and proper procedure must be followed before taking anyone off the voter list. The whims and fancies of officials serving on the poll panel cannot be the sole reason behind declaring them ineligible to take part in the democratic process. An Indian must vote because it is their right and not by the grace of the ECI. And a chief minister appearing in court to plead this constitutional right is not a comfortable sight.
