To avoid further humiliation, CEC must reveal names of ‘foreigners’ identified during SIR, reinstate deleted voters, and issue a public apology
After coming under extreme pressure on account of massive nationwide protests against his authoritarian decisions related to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, as exposed in recent reports by The Indian Express – and clearly intended to benefit the regime – Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar can save himself further ignominy if he takes courage and does something quite simple.
At the moment, he is reportedly doing his best to backpedal, and has evidently instructed Election Commission (EC) officials across the country to launch a “special drive” to bring back unfairly “left out” voters to the electoral rolls.
Is CEC sorry yet?
But this, quite simply, does not go far enough, especially when seen in the light of the devious and duplicitous Form 7-related actions of the EC, through which its own officials have struck off lakhs of voters from the electoral rolls, most notably in West Bengal, and looked away when ideologically motivated elements have made bulk objections in the constituencies to have voters from among the minorities deleted. This has come to light especially in West Bengal, Odisha, and several districts of Karnataka.
Also read: Who is Gyanesh Kumar, India’s new Chief Election Commissioner
Let alone atonement, Kumar has given no signs of acknowledgment of his surreptitiously executed moves of political partisanship – bypassing his two brother commissioners – which has had the grave effect of disenfranchising more than 13 crore Indian voters already, even as the SIR process marches on.
Bad faith has still not been banished. Indeed, the blatant removal of voters in bulk amounts to an act of sabotage of India’s democracy and its Constitution. This is a serious crime.
Kumar must expose ‘hidden aliens’
It is just probable that Kumar may find some amelioration if he opts to take two uncomplicated steps. One, he can right away put out in the public space the names and other relevant details of the foreigners – or in Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s words, “ghuspaithiyas” (Hindi for infiltrators), code lingo for Muslims used by Shah and his ideological fellow-travellers – whose existence has been revealed through the SIR process.
Also read: When State elects the people: Notebandi, votebandi and the inversion of democracy
It is of course no business of the EC to hunt for undesirable aliens in our midst under any pretext. Under the Constitution, that is the remit of the Union Home Ministry alone. Nonetheless, the unstated premise underlying the SIR process is that a voter is a hidden alien if s/he cannot be “mapped,” i.e., if his or her parents or grandparents cannot be shown to have voted in the election held in the 2002-2004 period. Also, the ignominy of the hidden alien is linked to voters of a certain faith, as the bulk applications for removal by unknown applicants suggests.
Was SIR worth the trouble?
For some extraordinary reason, voting in state elections held in this period has been deemed the high watermark of proof of being Indian. It is not explained why. Your parents could have been genuine voters but did not or could not vote (and that’s not illegal). Does that make them dubious, and does that make their progeny (you) ineligible to register as voters now? The question is roiling the country now because this is what the Election Commission decreed, god knows why or if, after being prodded by an authority outside of the poll body.
Anyhow, since this has been the method chosen, it is time the EC told us, state-wise, how many foreigners have been unearthed through SIR. Figures being bandied about in the media suggest something only in the very low hundreds for the state of Bihar. There is silence as regards other states. The larger question will be: Was it necessary or worthwhile to send the whole country – lakhs and crores of people – scurrying to find back papers to be appropriately “mapped,” in the process causing severe anxiety and pain as well as effort.
Voter reinstatement, apology
The foreigners in our midst must naturally be excluded and be proceeded against as per law. As for all others, it is only logical and fair to expect that they be put back on the electoral list without further loss of time, cancelling all hearings by tribunals and hearings at the Supreme Court or a high court – and this to be followed on by a national apology by the EC, with its chief asking people for forgiveness for having put them through the ordeal.
Also read: EC dissent row: How RTI can unlock minutes, orders on SIR decisions
After that, he must be subjected to the most rigorous questioning imaginable, duly televised for the nation to see. Should he be tried? That’s a matter of detail.
Why Kumar meddled with history
There is a reason why every Indian must be put back on the voting rolls, making adjustments for the fact that no one may vote in two places. A brief excursion into history is useful in this context and helps us understand the true import of universal franchise for a free nation that has shaken off the colonial yoke.
Ornit Shani, the scholar of how the nuts and bolts of democracy in India came into being, tells us in her remarkable study, ‘How India Became Democratic’ (Cambridge University Press, 2017) that Indians became voters before they became citizens. Indeed, from November 1947, India embarked on the preparation of the first draft electoral roll based on universal adult franchise. A handful of bureaucrats in the Constituent Assembly secretariat “initiated the undertaking” as the process of partition was underway and communal madness had not ebbed. At this juncture the princely states had also not been integrated into post-colonial India.
Also read: SIR voter deletions: Can INDIA Bloc turn discontent into a movement?
Turning all adult Indians into voters over the next two years before they became citizens with the commencement of the Constitution was “India’s stark act of decolonisation”. In British India, voting had existed but was severely restricted; in an extremely poor society it was hemmed in by educational qualifications and property rights.
So, this is the backstory. What the EC has done under the watch of Gyanesh Kumar, handpicked by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Shah, is to try brazenly to reverse the wheels of history.
Naturally, India is not pleased.
(The Federal seeks to present views and opinions from all sides of the spectrum. The information, ideas or opinions in the articles are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Federal)
