New Delhi, May 14 (PTI) Activist Anjali Bharadwaj on Thursday called for the immediate suspension of the next phase of SIR, arguing that the exercise had generated serious concerns about transparency, voter disenfranchisement and institutional accountability in the wake of the recent West Bengal polls.
Speaking at a discussion on electoral integrity alongside former chief election commissioners S Y Quraishi and Ashok Lavasa, activist Harsh Mander and academic Apoorvanand, Bharadwaj urged the Supreme Court to intervene before further phases of the exercise were carried out.
The discussion follows an announcement by the Election Commission of India (ECI) earlier in the day, declaring the rollout of phase 3 of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in 16 states and three Union territories in a phased manner beginning May 30.
“I think the Supreme Court should say that the SIR of electoral rolls should be stopped. What is the need to do the SIR now when so many questions, so many problems are being raised, so much arbitrary work is being done?” Bharadwaj questioned.
Opposition parties and civil society groups have raised serious allegations after the recently concluded West Bengal Assembly elections, with critics claiming that large-scale deletions and scrutiny of voter records had disproportionately affected minorities.
The ECI has maintained that the revision exercise was aimed at improving the accuracy of electoral rolls and identifying duplicate or erroneous entries.
Referring to the controversy surrounding the West Bengal polls, Bharadwaj raised concerns over notices linked to “logical discrepancies” and claimed that a disproportionately large number of Muslims had been removed from voter rolls. She also questioned the lack of official documentation behind the exercise, saying RTI responses from the poll panel failed to clarify who authorised the process and on what basis.
She said the ECI informed petitioners in an affidavit before the Supreme Court that the decision was based on an “independent appraisal”, but allegedly failed to provide any documented material supporting that.
According to the activist, queries on who was consulted and how the decision was taken were met with replies stating that “no such information existed in material form”.
“If the ECI did not take the decision, then who did? The Ministry of Home Affairs? BJP headquarters?” she asked, adding that the process appeared to have been carried out without proper official records or public accountability.
She questioned the urgency behind continuing subsequent phases of the SIR exercise while legal and procedural concerns remained unresolved.
Quraishi expressed alarm over what he described as the “weakening of democratic institutions” and the “erosion of faith in the electoral process”.
“I cannot understand how a democracy with a 75-year history could be hijacked so easily,” he said, adding that the developments were “deeply disturbing”.
Referring to reports that former Tamil Nadu chief minister M K Stalin had allegedly lost by around 8,000 votes in one constituency, Quraishi questioned whether elections could still be considered valid if the number of deleted voters exceeded the margin of victory or defeat. “In such circumstances, can the election itself be declared void?” he asked.
He further said the comment, “It’s alright, vote next time”, allegedly made by a judge during proceedings linked to the electoral revision exercise, reminded Quraishi of the infamous “Let them eat cake” remark — often misattributed to 18th-century French aristocrat Marie Antoinette. The remark is widely used to imply the profound disconnect of the ruling classes from people’s suffering.
Lavasa, meanwhile, said the poll panel had historically enjoyed “international respect” because of its transparent procedures and institutional credibility, but added that many questions remained unanswered regarding the SIR process.
“One big problem that has come up is this tool of logical discrepancy,” Lavasa said, urging the ECI to publicly explain how the mechanism worked and what standards were being applied. He noted that earlier deduplication exercises were limited to identifying whether the same voter was registered in multiple places and still required individual notices and hearings before any deletion.
Lavasa pointed out that the inclusion in electoral rolls itself meant voters had already passed an initial verification process. “It is only some external tool which identified discrepancy,” he said, adding that citizens deserved clarity on whether adequate time and opportunity would be given to resolve grievances.
He also questioned why elections were being conducted if the revision exercise remained incomplete. Drawing parallels with Assam’s “D-voter” controversy and the NRC process, he noted that even in Assam – where over 19 lakh people were ultimately excluded from the NRC list – a similar SIR exercise had not been undertaken.
Alleging that the SIR exercise was effectively being used as a “backdoor citizenship investigation”, Mander noted that the ECI has no constitutional authority to determine citizenship.
“The Supreme Court has clarified many times earlier that the ECI is not the body that determines citizenship. It is not their job,” he said.
Referring to the political climate in West Bengal and Odisha, Mander said elections were taking place amid attacks on minorities with little national outrage. “No impartial observer can honestly say that free and fair elections are taking place,” he remarked. Apoorvanand alleged that the electoral process itself had become increasingly driven by communal polarisation.
Referring to developments in West Bengal and Assam, he claimed that elections were being fought on religious lines in violation of constitutional principles.
He also expressed concern over what he described as growing intimidation of minorities, alleging that reports of attacks on Muslims and Christians were emerging regularly from villages in Odisha. PTI AO PRK
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.