The ECI is facing unprecedented criticism after it launched a SIR of voter lists across several states. Critics argue that the move breaches statutory provisions, undermines universal adult suffrage, and reflects partisan bias.
Key Developments
- More than 13 crore voters have been removed from rolls under the SIR, marking what may be the biggest disenfranchisement exercise in any democracy.
- The operation is said to contravene Section 21 of the RP Act and Rule 25 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
- Two senior ECs have alleged that they were excluded from decision‑making, raising questions about the unilateral authority of the CEC.
- Opposition parties are considering an impeachment motion against the CEC, citing “serious misconduct”. The impeachment procedure mirrors that for Supreme Court judges.
Important Legal Points
Article 324 gives the Commission authority only in matters not covered by law. Since the RP Act already provides mechanisms for revision, a “special intensive revision” lacks statutory backing. Moreover, Article 326 obliges the state to include, not exclude, eligible voters.
Exam Relevance
- Understanding the constitutional design of the ECI and its safeguards against executive control is essential for GS2 (Polity).
- The debate in the Constituent Assembly, especially Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s insistence on a centralized commission, illustrates the historical intent to prevent partisan manipulation of elections.
- Legal provisions like Section 21 and the distinction between intensive, summary, and special revisions are crucial for answering questions on electoral law.
- The potential impeachment of the CEC highlights procedural aspects of accountability of constitutional functionaries, a topic often asked in GS2.
Way Forward
To restore credibility, the ECI should:
- Seek explicit legislative amendment if it wishes to introduce a new category like “special intensive revision”.
- Ensure decisions are taken collectively by the CEC and ECs, respecting the constitutional requirement for collegiality.
- Allow judicial review of the SIR process to safeguard voters’ rights under Article 326.
- Adopt transparent criteria for deletion of names, with adequate grievance redressal mechanisms.
These steps would align the Commission’s actions with constitutional mandates and reinforce public trust ahead of upcoming elections.