Poll panel's clarifications on SIR, ‘vote fraud' not adequate: Ex-CEC OP Rawat
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
19 minutes ago
- India Today
Parliament Monsoon session ends: Who won the battle of narratives? Experts debate
The month-long Monsoon session of Parliament ended on Thursday after it witnessed almost daily disruptions and noisy protests by the Opposition in both Houses over the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bihar. The session that started on July 21 had 21 sittings with 37 hours and 7 minutes of effective business, according to the Lok Sabha secretariat. The debate on Operation Sindoor was the high point of the session, which saw heated exchanges between the opposition and Treasury benches. The opposition also sought a discussion on the special intensive revision of the voter list by the election commission in Bihar, but this was rejected by the government. So, who won the battle of narratives in the monsoon session? Watch as experts discuss this and more on the show,
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
In Bihar 2003, Election Commission took longer, allowed EPIC, checked citizenship selectively
DEFENDING THE ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls, the Election Commission of India (ECI) not only held up the 2002–03 roll as the benchmark of voter eligibility, but strongly backed its three-month timeline, and refused to accept the Supreme Court's suggestion to consider the voter ID card as proof of eligibility. However, the Commission's instructions during that 2002–03 intensive revision paint a different picture, according to former ECI officials and Chief Electoral Officers who oversaw the last exercise. Consider the following: * In 2002-03, seven states — Bihar, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Punjab — had eight months, more than double the time allowed now, to complete the process. * No proof of citizenship was sought then from existing electors in 2002 rolls. * The Elector's Photo Identity Card (EPIC) was the backbone of verification of existing voters then. In effect, with these criteria and not where one of 11 documents are required, the process for those who got on the 2003 list — about 4.96 crore — was, in both letter and spirit, much more inclusive. An email sent to the Election Commission for its comment did not elicit a response. These differences lie at the heart of the petitions now before the Supreme Court. The petitioners argued that the three-month window (June 25–September 30, 2025) is unreasonably short in a state headed for polls in October–November, where many voters struggle to procure documents. They also contended that the ECI is straying into questions of nationality, which is beyond its mandate. The Court will resume hearing the matter on Friday. Three aspects of the 2002–03 exercise which sit uneasily with the Commission's defence of the Bihar SIR: * Compressed Timeline: In its counter affidavit before the Supreme Court, the ECI dismissed concerns over timelines as 'misconceived, erroneous and unsustainable,' and said its order provides 'adequate time' for completion. 'The last such exercise was undertaken in Bihar in 2002-2003, and the period of enumeration was from 15.07.2002 to 14.08.2002. The current SIR has an enumeration period from 25.06.2025 to 26.07.2025. Thus, the allegation that ECI is conducting the exercise hastily is misconceived,' it said in the affidavit before the apex court. The Commission's claim on the one-month enumeration (or door-to-door verification) window is factually correct, but incomplete — the 2002–03 revision had stretched over eight months. 'The ongoing SIR exercise in Bihar — starting with training, door-to-door verification of electors, collection of eligibility documents, scrutiny of claims and objections, and ending with final publication of rolls — must be completed in just 97 days. By contrast, the last intensive revision in Bihar and six other states stretched from May 2002 to December 2002, lasting eight months,' said a retired ECI official associated with the 2002–03 intensive revision, on the condition of anonymity. In 2002–03, the intensive revision spanned 243 days; 74 days for preparing a preliminary list of electors based on existing rolls, training enumerators, conducting pre-enumeration surveys, and rationalising polling booths; 31 days for house-to-house verification, also known as the enumeration phase; 60 days for preparing and printing draft rolls; 15 days for claims and objections; and 61 days for disposing of these claims, making additions, deletions and corrections. The current exercise, by contrast, has been compressed to 97 days: one month for training enumerators, conducting pre-enumeration surveys, rationalising polling booths and carrying out the enumeration itself; publication of draft rolls three days later on August 1; one month for filing claims and objections; 25 days for their disposal and for deciding on enumeration; and final publication on October 1 — barely weeks before the likely announcement of poll dates. * Year 2003 as 'Probative Evidence': Equally significant is the 2003 cut-off itself. The Commission has argued that electors on the rolls until that year should be presumed citizens since they 'have gone through the intensive revision of 2003 and remained so far in the electoral rolls, demonstrating probative evidence of eligibility.' 'Thus, their eligibility, as enumerated under Article 326 of the Constitution of India, is presumed, unless any other input is received otherwise,' the ECI said in its counter affidavit before the SC, calling the 2003 cut-off 'valid and non-discriminatory.' While relying on the last intensive revision as probative of citizenship, the 2002–03 exercise itself did not require electors to produce such proof. 'In the 2002–03 revision, enumerators visited households with lists drawn from existing rolls and verified whether the names of adult Indian citizens already on the list were still ordinarily resident. They corrected or added particulars where needed, but electors were not asked to produce proof of citizenship,' recalled a former state CEO associated with the last intensive revision across seven states in 2002-03, who did not wish to be identified. In fact, the 2002–03 instructions made clear that enumerators were not to determine citizenship. Their role was limited to verifying qualifications of age and ordinary residence. For checking nationality, there were only two exceptions. First, in the case of first-time electors seeking registration, the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) could, if he or she felt the need, seek documents to satisfy the question of citizenship. The ERO was also directed to ensure that no person who had been declared a foreigner, or whose name had been deleted as such by any tribunal or authority under a central or state law, was included in the final rolls, even if their names appeared in the existing electoral roll of 2002. Second, in areas with a substantial presence of foreign nationals, as flagged by the state government, the 2002–03 guidelines prescribed additional safeguards. Existing electors in these areas did not have to prove citizenship. However, enumerators could add new names only if they belonged to households already on the rolls or if they possessed an EPIC. All other applicants had to apply separately. In new cases, the ERO was responsible for verifying citizenship under relevant laws, conducting fair hearings, and considering a range of documents — passports, birth or citizenship certificates, NRC entries. * EPIC Card: In the 2002–03 intensive revision, the voter ID card or EPIC was the backbone of verification of existing electors — enumerators were told to check it at every household and correct the particulars on that basis. 'They were ordered to ask electors or their family members to produce the card, match the EPIC number in the list with the one on the card,'' said a former state CEO who did not wish to be identified. Two decades later, the Commission has taken a different position. In the ongoing Special Intensive Revision in Bihar, it didn't accept the Supreme Court's suggestion to consider EPIC cards as proof of eligibility for existing electors of Bihar. 'That it is submitted that the EPIC cannot be treated as proof of eligibility for inclusion in the electoral roll during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR), 2025, as pursuant to Rule 21(3) of the RP Act, 1950 read with Rule 25 of the RER, 1960, the said revision constitutes a de novo preparation of the electoral roll. The EPIC cards are prepared on the basis of electoral rolls. Since the electoral roll, itself, is being revised, the production of EPIC Cards will make the whole exercise futile,' the EC said in its counter affidavit. An intensive revision of the electoral roll is a de novo preparation of the roll from scratch through house-to-house verification by Electoral Registration Officers. The ECI announced a nationwide special intensive revision starting with Bihar on June 24, and said it was needed due to 'significant change' in rolls since 2003, driven by urbanisation, migration for work and study, and voters registering at new addresses without deleting old ones, leading to duplicates. Officials also point to repeated complaints from political parties, including Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's allegation of manipulation in Maharashtra.
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
ISF MLA Nawsad Siddique gets bail a day after arrest over protest against SIR in Kolkata
Kolkata Indian Secular Front legislator Nawsad Siddique and other party workers have been granted bail on Thursday (August 21, 2025), a day after they were arrested by Kolkata Police during a protest against the Special Intensive Revision (SIR). Mr. Siddique and 94 others were produced at court on Thursday. They were arrested during a protest at the Esplanade area in central Kolkata on Wednesday. Mr Siddique is the lone MLA from ISF and was leading the demonstrations on Wednesday when tensions rose and led to clashes between ISF workers and the Kolkata Police. 'These protests will continue. This is a fight of the people, this is just the beginning. They cannot permanently keep us in jail. For how long will they keep us in jail?' Mr. Siddique said on Thursday morning before being taken to court. Huge protests erupted outside the Bankshall Court in Kolkata organised by ISF workers on Thursday. They demanded that their leader and other party workers detained during the protests on Wednesday be released immediately. Hundreds of protesters were waving the Indian flag outside the city court amid heavy police presence. Kolkata Police Deputy Commissioner (Central) Indira Mukherjee was also present at the Bankshall Court along with other officials. Mr. Siddique and the others were arrested on multiple accounts, and several non-bailable sections were levied on the 95 persons. The cases were registered at Hare Street Police Station and Bowbazar Police Station. A non-bailable Section 132 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) was also brought against the ISF leader, which deals with the assault of a public servant during duty. They were also charged under the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. All the accused were released on a bond of ₹500 by the court. After his release, Mr. Siddique received a hero's welcome from his supporters waiting outside the court premises. On Wednesday, the ISF MLA from Bhangar constituency and his fellow party workers were protesting against Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists, the harassment of Bengali migrant labourers in Bharatiya Janta Party-ruled States across the country, and the WAQF Amendment Act among other issues. While being detained, Mr. Siddique, from a police van, said that they were not allowed to hold rightful protests when their own brothers are being harassed.
