logo
Half of Bihar could lose voting rights: ADR's Jagdeep Chhokar on EC's voter list revision

Half of Bihar could lose voting rights: ADR's Jagdeep Chhokar on EC's voter list revision

Hindustan Times6 hours ago
The Election Commission's (EC) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bihar has triggered a political storm, with the opposition Congress dubbing it 'a rigging attempt' orchestrated by the poll panel under instructions from the ruling regime. Jagdeep Chhokar said the SIR is problematic and illegal as people added to the rolls after January 1, 2003 have been deleted without due process.(X/@JagdeepChhokar)
At least half a dozen petitions by political parties, individuals and civil society groups have been filed in the Supreme Court against what they call a 'blatantly unconstitutional' exercise.
Impractical reasoning
The Supreme Court will hear these petitions on July 10. Jagdeep Chhokar, co-founder of the election watchdog Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and one of the petitioners in SC against SIR, says the process is 'illegal and impractical.'
Half of Bihar could lose voting rights if SIR is not stopped right now, Chhokar tells Hindustan Times.
'In its June 24, 2025 notification, the EC said there is a presumption of citizenship for people whose names are in the electoral rolls before January 1, 2003. This means there is no presumption of citizenship for people added to the rolls after January 1, 2003. This also means people added to the voter list from January 1, 2003, to June 23, 2025, have effectively been deleted from the electoral rolls,' he says.
Deletion of names
But there are laws for the deletion of names from the voters' list, the ADR co-founder points out. 'The Registration of Electors Rule, 1960 and the Representation of the People Act, 1951 say if the EC intends to delete voters' names, it has to send a notice to the person or persons. The poll panel is supposed to find reasons why his or her name should not be deleted, so there is a provision for giving a personal hearing.
Chhokar says people who were added to the rolls after January 1, 2003, have been deleted without following due process. That is precisely why the SIR is problematic and illegal, he says.
ALSO READ | Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar progressing as per order: EC
The election commission is empowered to conduct a summary or intensive revision of electoral rolls whenever it wants, for reasons to be recorded. The EC has cited rapid urbanisation, frequent migration, young citizens becoming eligible to vote, non-reporting of deaths, and inclusion of the names of foreign illegal immigrants as reasons that have necessitated the intensive revision.
'But these reasons have been there for 20-25 years. These reasons being cited right now are not justified."
The question of voter eligibility
The issue of voter eligibility is another problem in the entire process, he says.
'Voter eligibility comes from Form VI, which has a declaration certifying that the person is a citizen of India with details. The person gives a certificate as proof of his date of birth, be it Aadhaar or any other document. But the notification issued on June 24 talks about a new declaration. So this is a change in the criteria for eligibility of a voter. This is illegal when done by the EC. This can be done by the Home Ministry, but not by the EC,' he says.
ALSO READ | All eligible citizens will be included: CEC on voter list revision in Bihar
Chhokar also questions the speed at which the SIR is being done. The EC started the exercise on June 25 and will complete it in about a month. 'A BLO goes to a voter's house and gives the enumeration form. The next time, he goes and collects the form. Each BLO has to go to a voter's house at least twice. Is it possible to complete the exercise in one month?' he asks.
In the face of criticism, Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar on July 6 defended the SIR of electoral rolls in the poll-bound state, saying the poll panel had 'invited all recognised political parties for interaction' on the matter and 'no one was satisfied with the current status of electoral rolls for one reason or the other'.
Migrant population
Chhokar points out that since 30-40 per cent of people from Bihar migrate to other states, it is not possible for them to fill out the enumeration forms. 'They won't be at home. The EC says that these people can download the form from the website, fill it, and upload. Now, imagine how a labourer from Bihar working in farms in Punjab and construction sites in Worli, Mumbai, can download and upload this form,' he says.
After the row, Bihar CEO issued an advertisement in newspapers saying one need not give documents and Aadhaar would do. But, Chhokar says, in a press note issued on July 6, EC said 'the electors can submit their documents any time before July 25, 2025.'
'This statement contradicts what the Bihar CEO says about 'Aadhaar will do', and that no other documents are required,' he says.
If this is being done and in the way it is being done, Chhokar says, more than half of the people of Bihar would be disenfranchised.
EC can do the revision exercise, but
Barring the citizenship question, Chhokar says, the EC can do the revision exercise.
'But the way it is being done is problematic. Had they done this a year ago, it would have been okay. The EC can do it legally, but that doesn't mean you violate existing laws. There are Supreme Court judgements, too,' he says.
The ADR has prayed that SIR be stopped completely, and if not now, at least order a stay and discuss it before taking it up again. 'If it is not stopped now, it will disrupt the electoral process and disenfranchise people. We know that if someone is not proven to be a citizen, he can also be deported. This is very dangerous,' Chhokar says.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

CAQM amends enforcement date for denying fuel to end-of-life vehicles for NCR
CAQM amends enforcement date for denying fuel to end-of-life vehicles for NCR

Time of India

time38 minutes ago

  • Time of India

CAQM amends enforcement date for denying fuel to end-of-life vehicles for NCR

New Delhi: The Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) on Tuesday announced that its order of denying fuel to end-of-life (EOL) vehicles in Delhi will now come into force on Nov 1, along with five high-vehicle-density districts of NCR. The NCR districts of Gurgaon, Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gautam Budh Nagar and Sonipat were supposed to follow the no-fuel directive from Nov 1 onwards. Delhi's date for applying the restrictions has been aligned with the NCR districts now as several people had said that implementing the policy only in Delhi in July would be a failure as car owners would go to NCR to refuel. The restrictions in the rest of NCR will be imposed from April 1, 2026. You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi CAQM partially amended its direction 89 on Tuesday after deliberations at its meeting. The ban on fuel to EOL vehicles came into force in Delhi on July 1. However, after public outcry, Delhi environment minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa wrote to CAQM on July 3, requesting the drive against EOL vehicles to be put on hold. He highlighted operational and technological shortcomings, including camera placements. Even chief minister Rekha Gupta on Sunday said her govt will urge Supreme Court to allow uniform rules on overaged vehicles in the national capital, in line with the rest of the country. LG VK Saxena also asked Delhi govt on Saturday to file a review petition in Supreme Court, urging reconsideration of its 2018 order mandating deregistration of EOL vehicles. "All EOL vehicles identified through the ANPR camera system or other such systems installed at the fuel pump stations shall be denied fuelling with effect from Nov 1 in Delhi and five high-vehicle density districts of Gurgaon, Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gautam Budh Nagar and Sonipat, and from April 1, 2026, in the rest of NCR," CAQM said. CAQM stated that the amendment will allow Delhi govt some time to address technological gaps in the implementation of the ANPR system. CAQM has directed the transport departments of Delhi and NCR states to ensure proper installation and operation of the ANPR system. "The transport departments in Delhi and NCR states have also been directed to ensure that trials of the ANPR system are conducted and training of manpower is done in a timely manner. They shall also widely disseminate this direction among all stakeholders, including fuel stations, and ensure its strict compliance through effective enforcement measures," CAQM said. It directed NCR states to inform the commission about the liquidation of the large fleet of EOL vehicles on a monthly basis. All petrol vehicles over 15 years old and diesel vehicles over 10 years old on roads are considered EOL vehicles. In 2015, NGT passed an order to ban 10-year-old diesel and 15-year-old petrol vehicles in Delhi-NCR and directed their deregistration and scrapping. In 2018, Supreme Court upheld the NGT direction. On July 1, 80 EOL vehicles were seized, but this number fell to seven the next day. However, on the third day, the govt formally approached the CAQM to pause the drive.

U.S. Supreme Court clears way for Trump's plans to downsize federal workforce
U.S. Supreme Court clears way for Trump's plans to downsize federal workforce

The Hindu

time2 hours ago

  • The Hindu

U.S. Supreme Court clears way for Trump's plans to downsize federal workforce

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 8, 2025) cleared the way for President Donald Trump's plans to downsize the federal workforce despite warnings that critical government services will be lost and hundreds of thousands of federal employees will be out of their jobs. The Justices overrode lower court orders that temporarily froze the cuts, which have been led by the Department of Government Efficiency. The Court said in an unsigned order that no specific cuts were in front of the justices, only an executive order issued by Mr. Trump and an administration directive for agencies to undertake job reductions. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only dissenting vote, accusing her colleagues of a 'demonstrated enthusiasm for greenlighting this President's legally dubious actions in an emergency posture.' Mr. Trump has repeatedly said voters gave him a mandate to remake the federal government, and he tapped billionaire ally Elon Musk to lead the charge through DOGE. Mr. Musk recently left his role. Downsizing of federal workforce Tens of thousands of federal workers have been fired, have left their jobs via deferred resignation programs or have been placed on leave. There is no official figure for the job cuts, but at least 75,000 federal employees took deferred resignation and thousands of probationary workers have already been let go. In May, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston found that Trump's administration needs congressional approval to make sizable reductions to the federal workforce. By a 2-1 vote, a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to block Illston's order, finding that the downsizing could have broader effects, including on the nation's food-safety system and health care for veterans. Illston directed numerous federal agencies to halt acting on the President's workforce executive order signed in February and a subsequent memo issued by DOGE and the Office of Personnel Management. Illston was nominated by former Democratic President Bill Clinton. The labor unions and nonprofit groups that sued over the downsizing offered the justices several examples of what would happen if it were allowed to take effect, including cuts of 40% to 50% at several agencies. Among the agencies affected by the order are the departments of Agriculture, Energy, Labour, the Interior, State, the Treasury and Veterans Affairs. It also applies to the National Science Foundation, Small Business Association, Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency.

The ECI does not have unfettered powers
The ECI does not have unfettered powers

The Hindu

time2 hours ago

  • The Hindu

The ECI does not have unfettered powers

The Election Commission of India (ECI) ordered a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar, which will be facing Assembly elections in November. Political parties in the Opposition have alleged that the SIR is aimed at disenfranchising thousands of voters in Bihar by disqualifying them on the ground that they are not citizens of India. The ECI has denied this allegation and justified the revision. In the meantime, many petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the ECI's order. While the controversy centres on the motive behind this exercise being conducted just a couple of months before elections, especially when electoral rolls were revised in 2024, this article focuses on the legality of this exercise and the powers of the ECI to undertake it. Reasons for disqualification Article 326 of the Constitution declares that elections to the Lok Sabha and the Assemblies shall be held on the basis of adult suffrage. This means every adult person is entitled to be a voter provided they are not disqualified on certain specified grounds. There are two essential qualifications of being an elector under this Article: the person should be citizen of India and should be aged not less than 18. The Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1950, lays down disqualifications for registration as an elector. These are namely unsoundness of mind as declared by a competent court, and disqualification from voting as provided in Section 11A of the 1951 RPA. Conditions for registration as a voter are laid down in Section 19 of the RPA: the person should not be less than 18 years of age and they should be ordinarily resident in a constituency. The term 'ordinarily resident' is explained in Section 20, which says a person shall not be deemed to be ordinarily resident merely because they own or possess a dwelling house in that constituency. Also, a person does not cease to be ordinarily resident if they absent themselves temporarily from their ordinary place of residence. The ECI enjoys enormous powers in respect of the preparation of electoral rolls and the conduct of elections to Parliament, the State Legislatures, and to the offices of the President and Vice President. Article 324 of the Constitution, which empowers the ECI to undertake these tasks, is characterised by the Supreme Court as a 'reservoir of power'. Since the conduct of free and fair elections is an essential feature of the basic structure of the Constitution, the ECI needs to be vested with all the necessary powers to complete its task. Nevertheless, it is inconceivable that the Constitution should confer on any authority unfettered powers. The Supreme Court has made it clear that the ECI can exercise all powers in its discretion in areas which are not covered by any statute but shall act in accordance with the law wherever it exists. In Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner (1978), the Court stated the law as follows: 'Firstly when Parliament or any State Legislature has made valid law relating to or in connection with elections, the Commission shall act in conformity with, not in violation of, such provisions but where such law is silent, Article 324 is a reservoir of power to act for the avowed purpose of pushing forward a free and fair election with expedition.' The qualifying date Let us look at the relevant provisions of the the RPA to get a perspective on the powers of the ECI in regard to revision of the electoral rolls. Section 21 of the 1950 RPA deals with the preparation and revision of electoral rolls. It speaks of four stages of revisions: (1) before elections to the Lok Sabha or Assembly; (2) before each by-election; (3) on the direction of the ECI in any year; and (4) a special revision for a constituency or part of a constituency with the ECI recording reasons for doing so. All revisions except (4) are done with reference to a qualifying date, which, under Section 14, is the first day of January. The only exception is (4): no qualifying date is mentioned because it can be done any time. The ECI order of June 24 mentions the qualifying date as 01/07/2025 and is a direction under Section 21(2)(b) of the RPA. It can be assumed that the revision being done in Bihar is under the same Section. But under this provision, the qualifying date should be 01/01/2025. The revision then should have been done from January 1, 2025. The qualifying date mentioned in the ECI order has no sanction under the law. Similarly, the term 'special intensive revision' is not found in the law. The only case where a special revision can be ordered by the ECI at any time is in relation to a constituency or a part of it and not in relation to an entire State. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that the SIR in Bihar is not in conformity with the provisions of the RPA. The ECI has claimed in its order that it has power under Section 21 to undertake the exercise. True, but that power is limited to a constituency or part of it under Section 21(3) of the Act. While enjoying enormous powers under Article 324, the ECI is responsible to the rule of law and should be amenable to the norms of natural justice as per the Supreme Court. Electoral registration officers cannot summarily reject applications on the ground that foolproof documents are not being furnished to prove citizenship. Rule 8 of the Registration of Electors Rules clearly state that information shall be furnished 'to the best of ability' of the citizens. The ECI cannot ignore this statutory stipulation.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store