Latest news with #JagdeepChhokar
Hindustan Times
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Half of Bihar could lose voting rights: ADR's Jagdeep Chhokar on EC's voter list revision
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.
Mint
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Mint
Interview: Half of Bihar could lose voting rights — ADR's Jagdeep Chhokar sounds alarm on EC's Bihar voter list revision
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. 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. The Supreme Court will take up these petitions on July 10. With claims of potential 'disenfranchisement' and the risk of creating 'second-class citizens,' the Election Commission's move has now snowballed into a major flashpoint ahead of the Bihar elections and chances of it being replicated in other states. In an exclusive interview with LiveMint, Jagdeep Chhokar, co-founder of the election watchdog, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), one of the petitioners in SC against SIR, explains why the process is illegal and impractical. Edited excerpts of the interview: A: We find the way this revision is being done and the timeframe illegal and impractical. I will explain why In its June 24, 2025 notification, the Election Commission says 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. But there are laws for the deletion of names from the voters' list. It is mentioned in the Registration of Electors Rule, 1960 and the Representation of the Act, 1951. In both cases, it's written that if people are enrolled in a voter list and the election commission intends to delete their names, it has to send a notice to the person or persons. In fact, if the person is not at home, the poll panel has to paste a notice outside his/her home. 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. A: People who were added to the rolls after January 1, 2003, have been deleted from the rolls without following due process, as mentioned in the law. Since these laws exist, this is problematic and illegal. 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 issue of voter eligibility is another problem in the entire process. A: 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. It asks one category of citizens to submit proof of date of birth and place of birth. For another category, it asks for proof of date of birth/place of birth of self and one of the parents. For another category, proof of date of birth and place of birth for both parents is required. So this is a change in the criteria for eligibility of a voter. This is illegal when done by the Election Commission. This can be done by the Home Ministry, but not by the Election Commission. A: The Election Commission 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? First, it is not possible that BLO will find everyone at home. Other issue which raises practicality questions is that 30-40 per cent people from Bihar migrate to other states. 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. Then the EC has listed 11 documents as proof. The requirement is to prove the date of birth and place of birth. A high school certificate is one of the documents. I have not so far seen a high school certificate which mentions myplace of birth. Only passport and birth certificates have place of birth. Only 2 per cent people of Bihar have passports. A school leaving certificate is also a requirement. How many people in Bihar pass high school? Because of these reasons, this is impractical. A: Yes, after people started asking these practical questions, Bihar CEO issued an advertisement in newspapers. The ad said you need not give documents and Aadhaar would do. There is a lot of confusion. Here is why. On July 6, the Election Commission issued a press note saying 'initial phase of Bihar SIR completed.' It also said '1.69 Crore (21.46 per cent) Enumeration Forms Collected 7.25 per cent uploaded on ECINET We have been asking how the 7.25 per cent of forms can be uploaded in such a short time. The press note also says, '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. The press note also says that 'After publication of draft Electoral Rolls, if any document is deficient, EROs can obtain such documents, from the electors whose name appears in the draft Electoral Rolls, during scrutiny in the Claims and Objection period.' It clearly shows that documents are required but they can be given later. Whether the last date is July 25 or the end of the 'complaint and objections' is not clear. A: I would not know. To my understanding, this should not been done in the way it is being done. But if this is being done and in the way it is being done, more than half of the people of Bihar would be disenfranchised. The EC says in its notice that it will be done in other states too. A: Barring the citizenship question, yes, 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. In the Lal Babu Hussein vS Electoral Registration Officer (1995), the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgments and issued comprehensive directions to the Election Commission. The court mandated that any action to delete a voter's name must be preceded by adequate evidence and must provide the affected individuals with a fair opportunity to present their case. The Court underscored the importance of natural justice, ensuring that the process is not only procedurally sound but also substantively fair. More than half of the people of Bihar would be disenfranchised. A: We want it to 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.
The Hindu
05-07-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Questions swirl around poll officers' powers to flag citizenship issues
As Bihar becomes the first State, at least since 2004, to go for an intensive overhaul of electoral rolls months before the Assembly election, questions swirl around the powers of Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) to report cases of suspected foreign nationals to a 'competent authority'. The Election Commission (EC) guidelines on Special Intensive Revision (SIR) for Bihar issued on June 24 do not specify the methodology to be followed by an ERO to flag the case of a suspected foreigner to a 'competent authority'. Editorial | Careful curation: On Bihar's Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls Any of the eleven documents, which include birth certificates, passports, caste certificates, school leaving certificates, pension documents, and a self-declaration form has been made compulsory to prove the date of birth 'and/or place of birth'. The guidelines said, 'Also, EROs will refer cases of suspected foreign nationals to the competent authority under the Citizenship Act, 1955.' '…For these purposes, AERO (assistant electoral registration officer) shall exercise ERO's powers independently u/s 13C(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950,' it added. No checklist Asked if there is a checklist to determine the citizenship of electors, a subject that comes under the purview of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), a senior EC official told The Hindu, 'This call will be taken by the ERO concerned. No specific list (has been provided). Different places have different systems.' To be included in the electoral rolls, nearly 2.93 crore people are expected to furnish the details. During the 2024 general elections, Bihar had 7.9 crore voters. Of this, 4.96 crore voters who were there in the 2003 revision list need not submit the details, the EC said. During 2003 intensive revision, enumerators were sent for door-to-door verification with a working copy containing details of the existing electors in a row, and a blank row for correction in the existing particulars and also for capturing details of newly eligible persons. Under the Citizenship Act, 1955, only the MHA has the authority to decide on citizenship issues. Periodically and through different orders, the MHA delegates the power to detect, detain or deport foreign nationals who are either undocumented or staying illegally, to State authorities, which may include the police or the district commissioners. However, the latest manual of the EC, issued in March 2023, mandated EROs to flag citizenship cases. The Opposition has termed Bihar's SIR exercise an attempt to compile the National Register of Citizens (NRC) through the backdoor. The NRC was opposed by several political parties as it had the potential to strip people of citizenship if they failed to produce documents. Jagdeep Chhokar of the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), a non-profit that moved the Supreme Court against the EC on Saturday said, 'The ECI has taken upon itself the implementation of the Citizenship Act. The exercise is based on presumption of citizenship to those who were part of the 2003 electoral rolls while others have to prove date of birth and/or place of birth.' 'Documents sought earlier too' Former Chief Election Commissioner O.P. Rawat said the powers of the ERO regarding deciding the citizenship of a person for inclusion in the voter list have been existing under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. He also said that even in 2003, SIR documents were sought from voters to prove citizenship. Mr. Rawat, though, added that the list of 11 documents sought by the EC are indicative and not exhaustive, and the ERO can satisfy himself with any other document furnished. In India, citizenship can be acquired by birth, descent, registration and naturalisation. The Citizenship Act enacted in 1955 granted citizenship by birth to any person born in India after January 26, 1950. The Act was amended in 1986, 2003 and 2019. The 1986 amendment, which followed the Assam agitation, said that those born in India would be considered Indian if at least one of the parents was an Indian. The 2003 amendment said that for those born between 1987 and 2003, both parents should be Indians and in case of one parent being an Indian, the other should not be an illegal migrant. The 2003 Act also inserted a new section on the issuance of national identity cards, authorising the MHA to compulsorily register every citizen of India and issue national identity cards. 'The Central Government may maintain a National Register of Indian Citizens (NRIC/NRC) and for that purpose establish a National Registration Authority,' the Act said. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), enacted in 2019 created another category exempted from the existing rules – it granted citizenship to undocumented migrants belonging to six minority communities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan who entered India before December 31, 2014. NRC backlash Though the law to compile NRC still exists, post-CAA protests in which 83 persons were killed from December 2019-February 2020 in police firing and riots in Assam, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Meghalaya and Delhi, the government said there was no plan as of now to compile the register. Even the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) poll manifesto before the 2024 Lok Sabha election dropped the proposal. As per Article 6 of the Constitution, the cut-off date for migration to India from Pakistan is July 19, 1948. In Assam bordering Bangladesh, the cut-off date for inclusion in the National Register of Citizens (NRC) is March 25, 1971, as spelt out in the Assam Accord. The Assam NRC, unique to the State, was monitored by the Supreme Court and the final list published on August 31, 2019 excluded 19 lakh out of 3.29 crore applicants in the State.
The Wire
09-06-2025
- Politics
- The Wire
Are Election Malpractices Undermining India's Claims of Being ‘the World's Biggest Democracy'?
For the best experience, open on your mobile browser or Download our App. Next Support independent journalism. Donate Now Politics Santosh Mehrotra and Jagdeep Chhokar 8 minutes ago Several methods have emerged in which the will of the people can be dishonoured. Illustration: Pariplab Chakraborty Real journalism holds power accountable Since 2015, The Wire has done just that. But we can continue only with your support. Contribute Now In recent years, the election process in India has been converted into one party's fiefdom. Two sets of methods have been weaponised to subvert the verdict of the people, which are adopted at each stage of the electoral voting system. They are used before voting day, or on the voting day, and after the voting day. We discuss each in turn. Before voting day There are at least three methods used to unfairly impact election results before voting day. First, through electoral rolls or voter lists, which see a selective deletion of voter names from a list. Reports essay the deletion of Yadavs or Muslims in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. In Delhi, the removal of jhuggi-jhopri (slum resident) voters' names was alleged to be a factor that is likely to have led to the defeat of Arvind Kejriwal's Aam Aadmi Party. Names from voter lists were allegedly deleted ahead of the Delhi elections, as well as Maharashtra state elections. Both occurred in quick succession after the Lok Sabha polls. This is an age-old method which has now been taken to new heights. The founders of Missing Voters, a smartphone app to track disenfranchised voters in India, estimated that nearly 120 million citizens were missing from voter lists in the 2019 national election. More than half of those disenfranchised citizens were Muslims or lower-caste Dalits – minorities who would, put together, normally constitute less than a third of the country's population. Women are also disproportionately affected: the political scientists Prannoy Roy and Dorab Sopariwala calculated in their book released in 2023 that, on average, approximately 40,000 female voters are missing from the electoral rolls in every constituency in India, a number often higher than the winning margin in many Lower House electoral contests. A National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam had declared 1.9 million people potentially stateless, and while Hindus in the list have been promised their paperwork through a new Citizenship Amendment Act, Muslims are left to face detention, and potentially even deportation. Members of the ruling party have promised to expand the NRC across India, sending some Muslims in big cities running to gather their documents lest they need to prove their citizenship to the government. A 2018 study published in the Economic and Political Weekly found that in the May state elections in Karnataka that year, an estimated 1.2 million Muslims were not able to vote – a number that suggested Muslims were disproportionately missing from the electoral rolls. The study was conducted by comparing single-voter households in the state with record population data. The root cause behind the voter registration manipulation is Rule 18 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, which allows for deletion of voter data without notice or an opportunity to be heard by the affected citizen. At the EC's assurance, the Supreme Court also disposed of a PIL which challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 18. This has clearly contributed to what many allege are large-scale deletion or addition of votes just before the elections in Maharashtra. It is not difficult to see why Muslims, Christians, Dalits and Adivasis would be the main targets for this electoral roll purge. For the 2019 Lok Sabha election, India had nearly 900 million registered voters and there have been reports of mass deletion of names from voters' lists from Assam, Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Uttarakhand and Delhi. The ECI has denied this. The outcome of such disenfranchisement of minorities is already visible: The 18th Lok Sabha (2024) has the lowest share of Muslim MPs in six decades. Less than 5% of its members currently are Muslims despite people from the community forming over 15% of the country's population. In fact, the decline in the share of the Muslim MPs in the Lok Sabha, in the 1990s, coincided with the rise of the BJP, whose total MP tally crossed the 100 mark for the first time in the 10th Lok Sabha (1991-96). Across India's 28 states, Muslims hold roughly 6% of the seats in state legislatures, which is less than half of their national population percentage. The representation of Christians is no better. The second method is to pay voters cash – bribery on a large scale. Small sums have now increased. The ruling party's hold of funds accumulated through the electoral bonds scheme was enormous. The SC judgment came five years too late, when the money had already been collected, and when the judgment did come, it did not require forfeiture of funds collected over the five years that the scheme was in operation. The ECI says it seized nearly half a billion dollars of cash. As cited by NPR, the last available survey, conducted years ago by Association of Democratic Reforms, suggested it plays a role for nearly 40% of voters. The higher capacity to pay is with the biggest political party, of course. A third method has recently emerged: to insert travelling voters of one party from other states (with duplicate identity cards) to polling booths in a state where elections are taking place, by duplicating Electronic Photo Identity Card (EPIC) numbers across states. This method was used, allegedly in Maharashtra and Delhi, to general acceptance. In Bengal, there was political upheaval over this. The ECI's response was: 'In this regard, it is clarified that while EPIC numbers of some of the electors may be identical, the other details, including demographic details, Assembly Constituency, and polling booth, are different for the electors with the same EPIC number.' The matter has rested there. These methods supplement a long-standing method that has been to physically prevent anti-government voters from coming out to vote – using state police force. The Ramgarh case in Uttar Pradesh is a classic and prevented the popular leader of the Samajwadi Party, Azam Khan, from being elected. After voting day (but before counting day) We now turn to the king of the insidious deeds being committed in cahoots with the ECI. But before we do that it is important to establish how the appointments of ECI members have been 'used' by the ruling government. Originally, the three members were to be selected from a list finalised by three people: the prime minister, the leader of the opposition, and the Chief Justice of India (CJI). That rule was changed by the ruling dispensation. In doing so, the government ignored a November 2023 judgement of the Supreme Court and passed a law in contravention of the court's conclusions by removing the CJI from the appointments committee, and replacing it with a cabinet member nominated by the Union government. This tilted the balance irreversibly in favour of the political executive of the day. The importance of this development will be seen below. To understand how this second set of methods has been used to subvert the electoral verdict of the people, it is important to explain the EVM system. To make the EVM system auditable and voter-verifiable, the Supreme Court had, in 2013, ordered introduction of Voter-Verified-Paper Audit Trail (or VVPATs). But in violation of Supreme Court order, the ECI, in February 2018 directed State Chief Electoral Officers to mandatorily verify VVPAT slips in only one randomly selected polling station in each assembly constituency. There is no statistical basis for this choice. This 0.3% sample size defeated the objective of installing VVPATs in all EVMs. The ECI in later hearings before the same court has stuck to its guns, and days before the April-May 2024 Lok Sabha polls were to begin, the SC accepted, without any basis, the ECI's plea that this sample size is sufficient. There are hardly any countries in the world that have adopted EVMs on the scale on which they have been used in India, for all types of elections. EVMs are nowhere the norm, in the world, certainly not for national elections (though several countries use it for local elections, which have reliable means of auditing EVM vote, especially in the US). We believe that if the EVM is to be continued to be used in India, the only possible way it should be allowed to continue is if the vote is verified by a paper trail in 100% of cases. Now let us turn to the ECI's purported methods for subverting the voter's vote as cast. The absence of a paper trail has enabled the insertion of votes in various constituencies by the hiking of vote percentages in all phases of polling. ECI announces only percent of votes cast (from among the eligible voters in a constituency), not the number of votes cast – violating the Representation of the People Act, which requires numbers of votes cast to be made public; accordingly, if the number of eligible voters is also made known, anyone can estimate the percentage. ECI is then free to announce, before the day of counting of the votes, a much higher percentage of votes cast – which are bogus votes. A study by the Vote for Democracy after the Lok Sabha elections 2024, concluded that 79 seats were won by the now ruling party, largely, on the basis of this method. It happened in the Lok Sabha elections to the extent of 55 million votes – that turned the election in constituencies that were marginal (i.e. where the margin of victory in the last election was small). Another study by the Association of Democratic Rights came to a similar conclusion about the total number of votes first announced by ECI, and then later enhanced before counting day. That essentially implies that voter names loaded onto EVM are of voters that did not vote and after polls closed – with ECI officers in collusion. This is what Congress's Rahul Gandhi has alleged for Maharashtra, that there were 6.5 million new voters added between 5.30 pm and 7.30 pm. There are stunning increases (7 to 12%) between the figures of votes polled and made available immediately after polls and before counting in the 2024 Lok Sabha. The same meticulous game appear to have been played in the elections to the state assemblies of Haryana and Maharashtra in 2024, where there was little likelihood of the sitting government being re-elected back to power – so great was the anti-incumbency. In addition, the ECI has played yet another game. At the end of polling on election day the ECI is required to provide 17-C forms – which can enable a candidate (or anyone) to verify the actual votes polled. This is to be provided to all candidates and their agents and also made public, but the ECI has not done so of late, except in a minority of cases. Is the EVM reliable? The EVM-centred electoral system has four critical components – microchips to record the votes as cast by the voter, VVPATs to audit and verify that the votes are counted as recorded, the voters' list and Symbol Loading Units (SLUs) that upload the name and symbol of the candidates contesting on a particular seat on VVPAT or paper trail machines roughly 10-15 days before. This change came in 2017. The fact that post 2017, the EVS (electronic voting system) is no more stand-alone but linked to the internet with the SLU having a labile memory has made the system susceptible to manipulation. The integrity of the microchips in the SLU is suspect because very few from the ECI, government and directors on the board of public sector undertakings BEL and ECIL (with known links with the ruling party) know about their design and source. The EVM contains multiple labile (i.e. writable) memories that records each vote as it is cast. The presence of labile memory implies that those values can be manipulated if access is available in any manner, externally. Some manipulations may not leave any trace and will not be visible in a forensic investigation. SLUs are not subject to any security protocol. The SLU is not, after or before election, stored in the strong-room. In other words here is another method for ensuring results can be manipulated. In July 2023, Sabyasachi Das of Ashoka University published a research paper called 'Democratic Backsliding in the World's Largest Democracy' which outlined two manipulations in detail that were carried out in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. 1) Registration manipulation, which is the padding of the electoral roll. By adding and deleting voters strategically. By manufacturing fake voters, most, if not all, of whom vote for the BJP. 2) Turnout manipulation, which is the addition of voter tallies after the polls have closed-most, if not all, of whom vote for the BJP Examples were given, claims supported. Soon thereafter Ashoka University was raided and given a strict warning by the government. Das was forced to quit. Linking Aadhaar with the Voter ID could also facilitate 'registration manipulation' causing mass disenfranchisement. This linkage could well be the cause for the current controversy concerning duplicate EPIC numbers which has been raised by Bengal's Trinamool Congress and admitted by the ECI. Finally, there is always the possibility of toppling the government already formed by buying out the MLA or MP. Over the period 2015 to 2024 as many as 10 state governments led by opposition parties were toppled by the ruling party government at the Union. This is done by simply buying the MLAs of the state ruling party, with the goal of making them support the party with the largest financial ability to buy MLAs. The defence of the ruling party is that this method has historically been adopted for a long time. However, the moot question here is: the use of the Enforcement Directorate, CBI and state police has been well demonstrated over the last decade. When the opposition complains about post-2024 election losses in state elections, as in Haryana, Maharashtra or Delhi, the defence of the ruling party is that they lost in Haryana and Maharashtra, so the opposition complains. They don't complain about Jharkhand. What is forgotten by those defending this response is the following fact, which turns out to be of singular importance: Haryana and Maharashtra were ruled by BJP, so the opposition is alleging state government-enabled fraud. This was not so easily possible in Jharkhand as the government belonged to an opposition party. Santosh Mehrotra was professor of Economics at JNU. Jagdeep Chhokhar was an IIM professor and is the founder of the Association of Democratic Rights. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments. Politics 'Prove it': Rahul Gandhi Doubles Down on Rigging Allegations After ECI's Unsigned Rebuttal View More
