Is the Election Commission Overstepping Its Bounds in Bihar's Electoral Roll Revision?

Concerns Over the Election Commission's Role

The actions of the Election Commission of India (ECI) have recently come under scrutiny, particularly regarding its perceived favoritism towards the ruling party and its treatment of the opposition. The ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar has intensified these concerns, especially following remarks from the Supreme Court during hearings on petitions against the SIR. A significant issue raised is the ECI's apparent assumption of authority to determine citizenship, a responsibility that should lie solely with the Union Home Ministry. However, delegating this power to the Home Ministry is equally problematic, given its controversial handling of the National Register of Citizens (NRC).

While the Supreme Court has permitted the ECI to proceed with the SIR in Bihar, Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi highlighted three critical issues, including the ECI's authority to verify voter citizenship. They emphasized the necessity of adhering to due process during the revision and questioned the timing of this initiative. The Bench stated, “This issue goes to the very root of democracy and the right to vote.” It acknowledged the ECI's constitutional powers, which extend beyond the Representation of People’s Act, 1951 (RPA), but clarified that judicial oversight is essential. The Court stressed that citizenship determinations should be made by the Ministry of Home Affairs, not the ECI, particularly when the ECI's counsel defended the exclusion of Aadhaar as a valid document.

The ECI's assertion that citizenship is a prerequisite for adult suffrage seems convoluted. The Bench pointed out that if this were true, the SIR should have commenced much earlier. The ECI's decision to disenfranchise individuals already on the electoral roll by 2025 could force them to appeal, a lengthy process that would infringe on their voting rights in the upcoming elections. The timing of this exercise, initiated just months before the Bihar elections, raises further suspicions. Justice Dhulia remarked, “If you ask for these documents immediately, even I will not be able to produce it now, look at the practicality, look at the timeline.”

The Supreme Court also instructed the ECI to clarify why Aadhaar, the Electoral Photo Identity Card, and ration cards are not accepted as valid documents in the SIR process. This could broaden the scope of the 11-document list that has caused widespread confusion and anxiety among the populace.

Historically, the ECI has received international praise for its efforts to include millions of voters in electoral rolls, thereby enhancing democratic participation. The Court rightly noted that the SIR primarily concerns identity verification, and none of the 11 documents currently required serve as definitive proof of citizenship. It questioned the exclusion of Aadhaar, which is fundamental for obtaining other documents, while accepting documents derived from Aadhaar, such as caste certificates. This inconsistency not only undermines the ECI's credibility but also suggests an ulterior motive to exclude certain voter demographics, particularly Muslims and Yadavs, to benefit the ruling BJP and its allies in Bihar.

The ECI's dismissal of Aadhaar, which has cost the national treasury hundreds of crores, as merely a proof of residence rather than citizenship, reflects a lack of understanding of the realities faced by Bihar's population. Data indicates that while 87% of Bihar's residents possess Aadhaar, only 45-50% have completed secondary education, and a mere 2% hold passports, which are part of the ECI's 11-document list.

The ECI's handling of the SIR has jeopardized its reputation as an independent constitutional body. It must demonstrate its commitment to ensuring that every citizen can participate in the electoral process rather than disenfranchising legitimate voters.

Interestingly, the concept of Aadhaar originated during the Congress-led UPA II government but was not enforced aggressively. The BJP, upon coming to power in 2014, made Aadhaar a central requirement for various aspects of life in India. Citizens were compelled to link Aadhaar to numerous services, and commercial entities began demanding it for transactions. However, the ECI's current stance against using Aadhaar for voting rights could signify a significant shift in its application.