Karnataka activists slam Special Intensive Revision, say poll process ‘weaponised'
Jagdeep Chhokar, founder-trustee of the Association for Democratic Reforms, said the ECI had 'invented' the SIR despite laws recognising only summary and intensive revisions. He alleged that 2.97 crore voters added after 2003 could lose their voting rights if they fail to produce new documents, handing electoral control to officials and political party-appointed booth-level agents.
'One of the major points of contention is the Election Commission's recent requirement for proof of date of birth during the SIR in Bihar', he said.
Retired IAS officer MG Devasahayam, coordinator of the Citizens' Commission on Elections, called the SIR a 'panic reaction' that bypassed established training, drafting, and procedural safeguards. He warned that the electoral process was being 'weaponised' and criticised electronic voting systems for vulnerability to manipulation.
He urged replacing EVMs with paper ballots, arguing they reduce large-scale fraud and restore electoral integrity despite minor irregularities. FDCA national general secretary Prof Saleem Engineer said the revision was aimed at excluding voters rather than including them, accusing the Home Ministry of pushing its agenda through the ECI.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
30 minutes ago
- Hans India
‘Stealing not considered sin but calling someone a thief is': Opposition slams EC over authentication appeal
Congress-led opposition parties hit back at the Election Commission on Sunday, over its appeal to authenticate their "vote chori" claims by filing a supporting affidavit and also termed its elaborate media address on the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) controversy a mere eyewash. Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, flanked by senior EC officials, held a press conference in the capital and claimed that deliberate attempts were being made to fearmonger and misguide the voters of Bihar, apparently by opposition parties. It also stated that such fearmongering won't deter it from pursuing and implementing laid-down protocols. Replying to the CEC's presser, Congress accused it of being partisan towards the ruling party, while the RJD said that its clarification was devoid of any substance. Congress leader Pawan Khera, in a strong rebuttal, said: "Stealing is not considered a sin, but calling someone a thief is? Stop the theft, and we will stop calling you thieves. Why hasn't anyone given an account of one lakh votes from Mahadevapura?" Further accusing it breach of privacy, he said: "(BJP leader) Anurag Thakur is carrying digital voter lists of six constituencies—where did he get them from? Isn't that a breach of privacy? Did the Election Commission issue him a notice? No. But when it comes to CCTV footage, you say it violates privacy..." RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha said: "No answers were given. Not a single question was answered. Maybe someone told them to hold the press conference because it was becoming embarrassing. So, they went ahead, but what was achieved? Which question did they actually answer? Forget the political parties—the voters are not convinced by your behaviour and conduct." "Logic cannot be used to justify opacity. Opacity means lack of transparency. The biggest concern is that the Election Commission appears neither impartial nor neutral. This should be a matter of serious concern for you." Purnia MP Pappu Yadav said, "The EC has no understanding of the Constitution or Babasaheb's (B.R. Ambedkar) ideas. After indulging in theft and robbery, will they speak about the Constitution?"
Indian Express
33 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Vandita Mishra writes: The umpire in the spotlight
Dear Express Reader, The week of the 79th Independence Day ended with a press conference by the Election Commission of India that was both welcome and unsettling. On the face of it, the EC sought to address questions raised by the Special Intensive Revision exercise ahead of the election in Bihar — and even though Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar did not take Rahul Gandhi's name, on Gandhi's allegations of 'vote chori'. That the EC sought to address questions swirling around it, when its conduct of the exercise in Bihar has raised serious apprehensions of large-scale disenfranchisement, was reassuring. But its tone and tenor has raised more questions. Over an hour and a half, the CEC's main message was: The EC does not discriminate between parties and stands with 'the people'; in a vast and multi-layered electoral process, the onus is on those who raise objections about fake voters and compromised voter lists to follow the rulebook, laid out procedures and timelines for making such complaints; and if they do not do so, they must either make a declaration on oath or apologise to 'the people'. There was something off-key about what the EC said and some conspicuous silences. To begin with, a constitutional body was insistently proclaiming its oneness with 'the people' while refusing to acknowledge the people's representative — the EC could have respectfully acknowledged the Leader of Opposition even as it countered his allegations and disagreed with him. More importantly, if it wanted to paint itself above the political fray, and as an institution that is procedurally even-handed, it should have addressed the fact that it has been put in the dock today not just by Rahul Gandhi's allegations, but also by the government. Of course, Rahul Gandhi cast the first stone, with his allegations of manipulation of electoral rolls/turnout figures in Maharashtra and then with his charges of defective electoral rolls in Mahadevapura constituency in Karnataka. But subsequently, the ruling party, while taking aim at Rahul Gandhi, has also ended up (unintentionally) targeting the EC. Listen in to another press conference, held on Wednesday, only a few days before the EC's meet-the-press on Sunday, and you will hear BJP's Anurag Thakur essentially repeating all of Rahul Gandhi's allegations — but with a communal tinge. Like Gandhi, Thakur alleged the presence of fake voters, duplication of names, mass additions, doubtful addresses and dubious first-time voters in lists, and the misuse of government machinery. The difference was that Thakur picked constituencies won by Opposition leaders to make his case — including Wayanad, Diamond Harbour, Kannauj, Rae Bareli — and that he repeatedly drew attention to the names of the so-called doubtful voters, all Muslim. In Thakur's list: Mohammad Kaif Khan, whose name allegedly appears in three lists in Rae Bareli, Khurshid Alam and Shabana Khatoon, whose name allegedly appears more than once in Diamond Harbour, Mahmoona in Wayanad, Sabri Begum, Shah Mohammad, Mohammad Shahbaz, Nisar Bano, Rafiullah … The list went on, and Thakur's chilling recitation left his audience in no doubt about what was remarkable and what was to be noted — the religion of the allegedly fraudulent voter in the lists. He connected the dots from the 'farji (fake) vote' to the Congress/Opposition's 'appeasement politics' that patronises the 'ghuspaithiya (infiltrator) vote bank', amid 'Islamic radicalisation' and threats posed by 'ek varg' (one section) to 'national security'. If in Maharashtra and Karnataka, Rahul Gandhi made a political leap, not backed by evidence, from pointing out purported defects/inconsistencies in the electoral rolls/turnout figures to saying that the election result was manipulated by the BJP, Thakur was making a similar leap on the back of a dog whistle politics. But what was common in the telling of both Gandhi and Thakur is the implication of the EC. After all, it is the poll monitor under whose watch the election was conducted, be it in Mahadevapura or Wayanad, Diamond Harbour or Rae Bareli, whether it was the Opposition that won or the BJP. The EC did not show any awareness in Sunday's press conference that it is under attack now from more than the LoP it churlishly refused to name. It did not seem to recognise that it cannot just challenge Rahul Gandhi to sign an affidavit, take an oath, and leave it at that. More fundamentally, the EC's refrain — show me the evidence, in the proper format, by a certain date, or else — shifts the onus of keeping the electoral rolls pure from itself to the people and political parties. Just as in the ongoing SIR in Bihar, the Commission shifted the responsibility of proving their innocence, or their citizenship, on the voters, by asking them to procure documents or be excluded, it is now saying that if anyone raises concerns about its exercise, it is they who must explain themselves, not the EC. This has disquieting implications in a grim moment for India's democracy. It is a time when wide and unsubstantiated allegations of 'vote chori' by the leader of the main Opposition party threaten to drown out the genuine and specific concerns about disenfranchisement sparked by the EC's exercise in Bihar. Rahul Gandhi's allegations have also raised a sombre question: Having raised the pitch so high, where does the Congress, and the Opposition, go from here? How do they dial back from a spiral into a politics of nihilism? If they don't find a way back from the edge, what happens to the peaceful transition of power that India has always prided itself on, and which we have taken for granted? Does it pose a new challenge to the conduct of elections, their legitimacy? And what happens if the result of the Bihar election is a close one? It is a grim moment, also, because of the Modi government's response — first its attempt to speak for the EC, instead of letting it speak for itself, adding to doubts on the latter's fairness and independence. And then its subsequent misfiring at Rahul that has ended up wounding the EC. But this is a sobering moment, most of all, because the EC, the constitutional authority with a hard-won autonomy, seems not to recognise the full scale of its own and the polity's predicament. Urgent repair work is needed by a credible and impartial umpire, there must be cross-party conversations on voters' lists and shared protocols, and the focus must be on voter inclusion, not voter exclusion, if a free fall is to be avoided into a political dead-end. That's the challenge. So far, the EC has not stepped up to it. Till next week, Vandita
Time of India
43 minutes ago
- Time of India
Preliminary checks of voting machines ahead of Maharashtra local body polls
PUNE: The state election commission is gearing up for the upcoming elections to local government bodies and, against that backdrop, electronic voting machines (EVMs) are undergoing first-level checks at the Electronics Corporation of India Limited (ECIL) in Hyderabad and the Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) in Pune. According to officials involved in the process, these checks involve just testing and calibration, and not sealing of the machines. State election commissioner Dinesh Waghmare told TOI on Saturday that Maharashtra currently has 65,000 EVMs, which he said were insufficient to cover 29 municipal corporations, 290 municipal councils and nagar panchayats, 32 zilla parishads, and 336 panchayat samitis. To bridge the shortfall, he said they have sought additional machines from Madhya Pradesh state election authorities and the chief electoral office of the state. You Can Also Check: Pune AQI | Weather in Pune | Bank Holidays in Pune | Public Holidays in Pune | Gold Rates Today in Pune | Silver Rates Today in Pune "Madhya Pradesh provided about 25,000 control units (CUs) and 75,000 ballot units (BUs), half of which were already sent to ECIL for first-level checks," Waghmare said. The state's chief electoral office also assured that it would provide 20,000 CUs and BUs, which will be checked at BEL's Pune facility. To ensure no shortage, the SEC placed an additional order for 50,000 CUs and 1 lakh BUs. Once all consignments are cleared, Maharashtra will have around 1.5 lakh CUs and 2 lakh BUs ready for the polls. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
