
Special Intensive Revision Of Electoral Rolls Cannot Be Allowed To Proceed In Its Current Form
The heart and soul of parliamentary democracy lie in the essential process of holding free and fair elections – a process that ensures a level playing field for all political parties. Owing to this feature, parliamentary democracy is often regarded as electoral democracy. It is not for nothing that the Constituent Assembly, which deliberated for two years before adopting the Constitution on January 26, 1950, addressed the various aspects of ensuring free and fair elections to the legislative assemblies and parliament in an extremely elaborate manner.
Naturally, this detailed blueprint for conducting elections placed central importance on the independent and bipartisan functioning of the Election Commission of India (ECI). To ensure that the ECI remained free from partisan political influence and functioned independently of both the union and state governments, wide and adequate powers were conferred upon it to place it in a position of absolute authority.
This mandate is enshrined in Article 324 of the Indian Constitution, which states that the Election Commission shall be vested with the superintendence, direction, and control of elections to parliament, state legislatures, and the offices of the President and Vice-President. The Election Commission is also responsible for preparing electoral rolls and conducting these elections.
Over the last 75 years, the electoral system has operated with a fair degree of integrity, transparency, and in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution. Despite minor aberrations, the ECI had earned respect both within India and across the world.
However, this scenario has changed since the Narendra Modi-led BJP government assumed office. The composition of the Commission has become a source of controversy, especially due to the manner in which the Supreme Court's recommendations on the composition of Search Committee — responsible for appointing the Chief Election Commissioner and other Commissioners — have been undermined, bringing the process under the absolute control and stranglehold of the executive. More importantly, the first Modi government introduced highly outrageous amendments to political funding of elections by allowing anonymous and unlimited corporate donations. This has fundamentally altered the landscape of electoral financing, enabling a dangerous quid pro quo between corporate interests and elected governments.
When the Supreme Court struck down the provisions enabling Electoral Bonds – terming the scheme unconstitutional – it exposed the pattern of political funding to public scrutiny. Not only was there clear evidence of disproportionate gains for the BJP compared to other political parties, but the manner in which these bonds were collected also revealed major financial irregularities and provided the clearest evidence of quid pro quo arrangements.
Other issues have also emerged in the public domain, such as concerns regarding the integrity of the composite Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and the Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) system. Numerous questions persist about technical details such as the source code and sanitisation protocols for the machines that are crucial to ensuring transparency and absolute integrity. The debate around these concerns remains unresolved.
In recent years, particularly in the run-up to the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, the partisan role of the Election Commission of India (ECI) has become increasingly visible. The ECI's inaction in the face of the BJP's brazen attempts to shield the prime minister and the home minister, and its failure to check the politicisation of the Pulwama-Balakot incidents to construct a security-centric, muscular nationalism narrative during election campaign facilitated a serious breach of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC).
This brings us to a crucial issue: the institutionalisation of political parties' role in shaping the conduct of elections. Traditionally, the ECI has based its major decisions and measures on consultations with, and suggestions from, political parties. The MCC itself is not a statutory provision, but rather an expression of political consensus across the spectrum.
The current concern relates to the Special Intensive Revision of the Electoral Roll ahead of the Bihar Assembly elections. The present term of the Bihar Assembly ends on November 22, 2025, and elections must naturally be held before that date. On June 24, 2025, the ECI issued a set of documents to initiate the revision process: a four-page press note, a nineteen-page letter to the Chief Electoral Officer of Bihar, a three-page order, nine pages of detailed guidelines, a two-page enumeration form including a declaration format, and a two-page declaration form with an indicative list of documents to be submitted in support of the declaration.
These detailed documents raise several serious questions. The first is one of chronology. The press note was issued on June 24, 2025, and the cut-off date for concluding the Special Intensive Revision has been set for July 1, 2025. In the interim, Electoral Registration Officers are required to print pre-filled enumeration forms (in duplicate) for all existing electors, distribute them to the respective Booth Level Officers (BLOs), and conduct training for the BLOs. The BLOs, in turn, must distribute the forms door-to-door, collect the filled forms, and verify them. In addition, higher officials must carry out rationalisation and rearrangement, finalise the proposed restructuring of polling stations, get the list of polling stations approved, publish the draft Electoral Rolls by August 1, 2025, and the final Electoral Rolls by September 30, 2025. The intervening two-month period is meant for the filing of claims and objections.
Even a cursory reading of these near-encyclopedic sized documents reveals their bizarre nature. Equally questionable is the justification offered for this intensive revision: rapid urbanisation, frequent migration, eligibility of new voters, non-reporting of deaths, and inclusion of names of foreign illegal immigrants. The revision is aimed to update the rolls with January 1, 2003 as the base reference date. These issues have persisted for over two decades. By this logic, the ECI is implying that elections held in Bihar over the last 22 years were compromised – an allegation that raises troubling questions about the legitimacy of past governments.
Although the documents briefly refer to the cooperation of political parties, the ECI has, in practice, undertaken this 'grand exercise' without any consultation with them. The invocation of illegal immigrants and the stringent documentation requirements strongly suggest a backdoor introduction of the NRC. There are numerous other gaps, both minor and major, in this entire exercise. It is clear that under the guise of a Special Intensive Revision, a significant number of deletions will be carried out in the name of 'cleansing' the electoral rolls. This will particularly impact Bihar's poor and working-class population, many of whom lack both digital and physical access due to their migratory circumstances.
This is Maharashtra in reverse, where between the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections, 39 lakh new voters were added to the rolls in just five months, defying demographic logic.
The final message is loud and clear: this exercise is intended to create a fresh bogey of polarisation under the pretext of infiltration. The Special Intensive Revision cannot proceed in its current form. Opposition parties have raised their voices. The ball is now squarely in the ECI's court – and the constitutional spirit must not be abandoned. (IPA Service)
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Gulf Today
12 hours ago
- Gulf Today
Russia first country to recognise Taliban govt
Afghanistan's government said on Thursday that Russia had become the first country to officially recognise its rule, calling it a "brave decision". The Taliban swept back to power in 2021 after ousting the foreign-backed government and have imposed an austere version of Islamic law. They have keenly sought official international recognition and investment, as the country recovers from four decades of war, including the Soviet invasion from 1979 to 1989. The announcement was made after Afghanistan's Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi met Russia's ambassador to Afghanistan, Dmitry Zhirnov, in Kabul on Thursday. "This brave decision will be an example for others... Now that the process of recognition has started, Russia was ahead of everyone," Muttaqi said in a video of the meeting on X. The flag of Afghanistan flutters at its embassy in Moscow on Friday. Reuters "Russia is the first country which has officially recognised the Islamic Emirate," Taliban foreign ministry spokesman Zia Ahmad Takal told AFP, using the government's name for their administration. Muttaqi said it was "a new phase of positive relations, mutual respect, and constructive engagement", the foreign ministry posted on X. Russia's foreign ministry added on Telegram: "We believe that the act of official recognition of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan will boost the development of productive bilateral cooperation between our countries in several areas." It highlighted potential "commercial and economic" cooperation in "energy, transportation, agriculture and infrastructure". 'Fight terrorism' The ministry said that Moscow hoped to continue helping Kabul "reinforce regional security and fight against the threats of terrorism and drug-trafficking". Moscow has taken recent steps to normalise relations with the Taliban authorities, removing them from a list of "terrorist organisations" in April and accepting a Taliban ambassador in Kabul. In July 2024, Russian President Vladimir Putin called the Taliban "allies in the fight against terrorism". Russia was the first country to open a business representative office in Kabul after the Taliban takeover, and has announced plans to use Afghanistan as a transit hub for gas heading to Southeast Asia. 'Allies' Only Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates recognised the Taliban during their first stint in power from 1996 to 2001. This time, multiple other states, including China and Pakistan, have accepted Taliban ambassadors in their capitals, but have not officially recognised the Islamic Emirate since the end of the then-insurgency's two-decade war with US-led NATO troops. There has been limited but growing engagement with the Taliban authorities, particularly from regional neighbours, but also major global players China and Russia. China on Friday said it welcomed Russia's decision. An official gestures next to the flag of Afghanistan as he stands on the balcony of the Afghan embassy in Moscow on July 4, 2025. AFP "As a traditional friendly neighbour of Afghanistan, the Chinese side has always believed that Afghanistan should not be excluded from the international community," foreign ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said. However, restrictions on women and girls, barring them from education and squeezing them from public life, have been key sticking points for Western nations. Multiple Afghan women activists were quick to condemn Russia's recognition. The move "legitimises a regime that bans girls from education, enforces public floggings, and shelters UN-sanctioned terrorists", said Mariam Solaimankhil, former member of Afghanistan's parliament. "The move signals that strategic interests will always outweigh human rights and international law." Senior Taliban figures remain under international sanctions, including by the United Nations. Another former MP in Kabul, Fawzia Koofi, said any recognition of the Taliban "will not bring peace it will legitimise impunity" and "risk endangering not just the people of Afghanistan, but also global security". Agence France-Presse


Arabian Post
a day ago
- Arabian Post
US Tightens Sanctions on Iran Oil Networks and Shadow Fleet
United States authorities have implemented a sweeping array of sanctions targeting companies, vessels and networks that facilitate clandestine oil exports from Iran. The Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control moved to freeze assets and prohibit transactions by an Iraqi-led smuggling group and its associated Iranian 'shadow fleet.' Simultaneously, the State Department added further designations aimed at restricting Tehran's access to critical oil revenues. The Treasury identified a complex smuggling operation orchestrated by Iraqi–British businessman Salim Ahmed Said, dating back to at least 2020. Said's firms specialise in blending Iranian crude with Iraqi oil before mislabelling shipments to evade sanctions. Vessels under his network, including tankers managed through UAE‑based VS Tankers FZE and VS Oil Terminal, have been instrumental in blending, ship‑to‑ship transfers and forging documentation to funnel oil into Western markets via Iraq or the UAE. The crackdown also zeroed in on vessels involved in covert logistics operations. Tankers flying flags of Panama, Comoros, Cameroon and the Marshall Islands—such as VIZURI, FOTIS, THEMIS, and BIANCA JOYSEL—have collectively shipped tens of millions of barrels of Iranian oil, often suspending their AIS transponders during transfers in international waters. ADVERTISEMENT Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent said the sanctions are emblematic of an 'eighth round' of measures targeting Iran's petroleum and petrochemical sectors under Executive Order 13902. He emphasised that these actions aim to deny Tehran 'the financial resources that fuel its destabilising activities'. Complementing this, the State Department designated six entities and four vessels under Executive Order 13846 for engaging in significant transactions involving Iranian petroleum, further amplifying legal consequences for those assisting Iran's oil trade. The sanctions coincide with U. S. airstrikes on Iran's nuclear infrastructure. While President Trump hinted that sanctions relief could follow if Iran adopts a peaceful trajectory, Treasury and State Department actions signal a contrasting posture of escalation and enforcement. Underpinning Tehran's tactics is what experts describe as a 'ghost fleet'—a web of shell companies, AIS manipulation and vessel flag‑hopping. This makes Iran's oil exports largely opaque and more difficult to police. The fleet's activities play a vital role in sustaining Iran's revenue streams, including funding for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps‑Qods Force. In the financial markets, the tightening of oil sanctions resonated swiftly. West Texas Intermediate crude prices edged above US$67 per barrel on Friday, spurred by expectations of tighter exports. However, analysts also pointed to anticipated increased output from OPEC+ in August as likely to mitigate sharp price movements. Strategic observers say the latest round of sanctions is designed to maintain pressure on Tehran, even as broader diplomacy plays out. The U. S. has signalled its willingness to explore a new nuclear agreement, potentially including incentives such as civilian nuclear investment and sanctions relief, if Iran exhibits restraint and begins meaningful nuclear negotiations. Critics argue, however, that while sanctions may narrow Tehran's financial margins, they can deepen its reliance on illicit networks. Tehran's pivot toward China, Russia and regional allies could be reinforced, with the shadow fleet evolving in sophistication despite the just‑announced sanctions. Meanwhile, Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht‑Ravanchi has stated that Tehran will not initiate further strikes against the U. S., citing a preference for de‑escalation. He affirmed Iran's decision to respond proportionately to airstrikes but warned more aggressive engagement could provoke additional military, political or economic measures. As diplomatic channels remain open, including planned talks in Oslo on nuclear constraints, sanctions authorities appear committed to preventing revenue flows that could support nuclear expansion or proxy activity. The U. S. approach suggests a concerted strategy of merging military pressure, sanction enforcement and back‑channel diplomacy to reshape Iran's calculus.


Arabian Post
a day ago
- Arabian Post
Special Intensive Revision Of Electoral Rolls Cannot Be Allowed To Proceed In Its Current Form
By P. Sudhir The heart and soul of parliamentary democracy lie in the essential process of holding free and fair elections – a process that ensures a level playing field for all political parties. Owing to this feature, parliamentary democracy is often regarded as electoral democracy. It is not for nothing that the Constituent Assembly, which deliberated for two years before adopting the Constitution on January 26, 1950, addressed the various aspects of ensuring free and fair elections to the legislative assemblies and parliament in an extremely elaborate manner. Naturally, this detailed blueprint for conducting elections placed central importance on the independent and bipartisan functioning of the Election Commission of India (ECI). To ensure that the ECI remained free from partisan political influence and functioned independently of both the union and state governments, wide and adequate powers were conferred upon it to place it in a position of absolute authority. This mandate is enshrined in Article 324 of the Indian Constitution, which states that the Election Commission shall be vested with the superintendence, direction, and control of elections to parliament, state legislatures, and the offices of the President and Vice-President. The Election Commission is also responsible for preparing electoral rolls and conducting these elections. Over the last 75 years, the electoral system has operated with a fair degree of integrity, transparency, and in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution. Despite minor aberrations, the ECI had earned respect both within India and across the world. However, this scenario has changed since the Narendra Modi-led BJP government assumed office. The composition of the Commission has become a source of controversy, especially due to the manner in which the Supreme Court's recommendations on the composition of Search Committee — responsible for appointing the Chief Election Commissioner and other Commissioners — have been undermined, bringing the process under the absolute control and stranglehold of the executive. More importantly, the first Modi government introduced highly outrageous amendments to political funding of elections by allowing anonymous and unlimited corporate donations. This has fundamentally altered the landscape of electoral financing, enabling a dangerous quid pro quo between corporate interests and elected governments. When the Supreme Court struck down the provisions enabling Electoral Bonds – terming the scheme unconstitutional – it exposed the pattern of political funding to public scrutiny. Not only was there clear evidence of disproportionate gains for the BJP compared to other political parties, but the manner in which these bonds were collected also revealed major financial irregularities and provided the clearest evidence of quid pro quo arrangements. Other issues have also emerged in the public domain, such as concerns regarding the integrity of the composite Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and the Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) system. Numerous questions persist about technical details such as the source code and sanitisation protocols for the machines that are crucial to ensuring transparency and absolute integrity. The debate around these concerns remains unresolved. In recent years, particularly in the run-up to the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, the partisan role of the Election Commission of India (ECI) has become increasingly visible. The ECI's inaction in the face of the BJP's brazen attempts to shield the prime minister and the home minister, and its failure to check the politicisation of the Pulwama-Balakot incidents to construct a security-centric, muscular nationalism narrative during election campaign facilitated a serious breach of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC). This brings us to a crucial issue: the institutionalisation of political parties' role in shaping the conduct of elections. Traditionally, the ECI has based its major decisions and measures on consultations with, and suggestions from, political parties. The MCC itself is not a statutory provision, but rather an expression of political consensus across the spectrum. The current concern relates to the Special Intensive Revision of the Electoral Roll ahead of the Bihar Assembly elections. The present term of the Bihar Assembly ends on November 22, 2025, and elections must naturally be held before that date. On June 24, 2025, the ECI issued a set of documents to initiate the revision process: a four-page press note, a nineteen-page letter to the Chief Electoral Officer of Bihar, a three-page order, nine pages of detailed guidelines, a two-page enumeration form including a declaration format, and a two-page declaration form with an indicative list of documents to be submitted in support of the declaration. These detailed documents raise several serious questions. The first is one of chronology. The press note was issued on June 24, 2025, and the cut-off date for concluding the Special Intensive Revision has been set for July 1, 2025. In the interim, Electoral Registration Officers are required to print pre-filled enumeration forms (in duplicate) for all existing electors, distribute them to the respective Booth Level Officers (BLOs), and conduct training for the BLOs. The BLOs, in turn, must distribute the forms door-to-door, collect the filled forms, and verify them. In addition, higher officials must carry out rationalisation and rearrangement, finalise the proposed restructuring of polling stations, get the list of polling stations approved, publish the draft Electoral Rolls by August 1, 2025, and the final Electoral Rolls by September 30, 2025. The intervening two-month period is meant for the filing of claims and objections. Even a cursory reading of these near-encyclopedic sized documents reveals their bizarre nature. Equally questionable is the justification offered for this intensive revision: rapid urbanisation, frequent migration, eligibility of new voters, non-reporting of deaths, and inclusion of names of foreign illegal immigrants. The revision is aimed to update the rolls with January 1, 2003 as the base reference date. These issues have persisted for over two decades. By this logic, the ECI is implying that elections held in Bihar over the last 22 years were compromised – an allegation that raises troubling questions about the legitimacy of past governments. Although the documents briefly refer to the cooperation of political parties, the ECI has, in practice, undertaken this 'grand exercise' without any consultation with them. The invocation of illegal immigrants and the stringent documentation requirements strongly suggest a backdoor introduction of the NRC. There are numerous other gaps, both minor and major, in this entire exercise. It is clear that under the guise of a Special Intensive Revision, a significant number of deletions will be carried out in the name of 'cleansing' the electoral rolls. This will particularly impact Bihar's poor and working-class population, many of whom lack both digital and physical access due to their migratory circumstances. This is Maharashtra in reverse, where between the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections, 39 lakh new voters were added to the rolls in just five months, defying demographic logic. The final message is loud and clear: this exercise is intended to create a fresh bogey of polarisation under the pretext of infiltration. The Special Intensive Revision cannot proceed in its current form. Opposition parties have raised their voices. The ball is now squarely in the ECI's court – and the constitutional spirit must not be abandoned. (IPA Service)