The Election Commission of India (ECI) appeared before the Supreme Court on a Thursday, where a hearing was underway concerning the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar. During the proceedings, the ECI expressed its predicament, stating it was 'caught between the struggle of political parties'.
The statement emphasised how controversial the electoral process is and how election results frequently raise doubts about the reliability of electronic voting machines (EVMs). The ECI remarked that if a political party wins, the EVMs are deemed reliable, but if the same party loses, the machines are suddenly perceived as faulty.
The hearing was presided over by a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi. The core of the matter was a petition challenging the ECI's decision, issued on June 24, to initiate the SIR in Bihar.
The Supreme Court cited the non-disclosure of voters' names who had been struck from the electoral rolls as a major subject of contention. The names of those who had been removed because of migration, death, or moving to another constituency were specifically requested by the Court from the ECI. At first, the ECI claimed that the Bihar political parties had already received these lists.
The Supreme Court, however, was not pleased with this answer and continued to pressure the ECI. The bench asked whether it was not possible for the ECI to post these names online or on a public notice board, for example. According to the Court's logic, this would enable any harmed citizen to seek corrective action within the names of those who had been removed because of migration, death, or moving to another constituency were specifically requested by the Court from the ECI.
Also Read: Bihar SIR protest: Rahul Gandhi, Opposition MPs detained
Following this line of questioning, which the article described as a 'grilling', the ECI eventually agreed to share the names of the deleted voters from Bihar's SIR. The Supreme Court then instructed the ECI to consider issuing a public notice. This notice would inform the public about the details of websites or other designated locations where information about voters who have died, migrated, or shifted is shared.
The article also provides context on the opposition to the Bihar SIR. Several opposition parties, including the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) and the Congress, along with the non-governmental organisation Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), have challenged the electoral roll revision drive.
In a related observation made on August 13, the Supreme Court had noted that electoral rolls cannot remain "static" and are subject to revision. The Court had also expressed a view that the ECI's decision to expand the list of acceptable identity documents for the Bihar SIR from seven to eleven was "voter-friendly and not exclusionary".
This statement implied that, despite closely examining the specifics of its execution, the Court saw the revision process as an essential and generally constructive step.
Also Read: No law to publish excluded list of voters: ECI to SC over SIR
Follow us
