Latest news with #LalBabuHussain
Hans India
5 days ago
- Politics
- Hans India
Grave fraud on voters
New Delhi: The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), in its reply to the Election Commission's counter in the Supreme Court, has argued that the poll body's claim of having the constitutional authority to verify voters' citizenship during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls flies in the face of past judgments. ADR also called the exclusion of Aadhaar and ration cards from the list of acceptable documents 'patently absurd,' noting that Aadhaar is widely accepted when applying for passports, caste certificates, and permanent residence documents. The petitioner further said the EC had failed to justify why the revision exercise must be rushed ahead of the upcoming Assembly elections, describing the way it is being conducted as a 'grave fraud' on the state's voters. Announced on June 24, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls has sparked controversy over both its timing and the requirement that voters enrolled after 2003 produce multiple documents to stay on the rolls, raising concerns about the potential disenfranchisement of many electors and, eventually, prompting legal challenges in the SC. Acting on the Court's directions, ADR — a non-profit that works on electoral reforms — filed its rejoinder on Saturday to the Commission's counter-affidavit submitted on July 21. In that filing, the Commission had argued that under Article 326 of the Constitution it is within its rights to verify the citizenship of electors and clarified that removal from the electoral rolls does not amount to termination of an individual's citizenship. The matter is next listed for hearing on July 28. Responding to the EC's argument that it has the authority to verify voters' citizenship, the petitioner said this contradicted previous Supreme Court rulings, including Lal Babu Hussain vs Union of India (1995), which held that the burden of proving citizenship lies with new applicants, not those already on the rolls. ADR also cited Inderjit Barua vs ECI (1985), where the Court held that being listed on the electoral roll was prima facie proof of citizenship, and the burden of disproving it rested with the objector.
Time of India
6 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Bihar SIR will disenfranchise lakhs, distort voter rolls ahead of polls, ADR warns Supreme Court
New Delhi: Ahead of the Supreme Court hearing on July 28, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), a key petitioner challenging the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR), has warned of the imminent exclusion of lakhs of electors ahead of the state assembly polls. ADR says this will distort the adult-to-elector ratio and vests "excessive discretionary power" in Electoral Registration Officers (EROs), enabling arbitrary disenfranchisement. ADR has also argued that the Election Commission's move to seek fresh proof of citizenship from already enrolled voters violates the Supreme Court's 1995 Lal Babu Hussain ruling, which held that the onus lies only on new applicants, not existing electors. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Cybersecurity others Digital Marketing Technology Public Policy healthcare Degree PGDM Leadership Project Management MCA Healthcare Finance Artificial Intelligence MBA Design Thinking Data Analytics Management Operations Management Data Science Others CXO Product Management Data Science Skills you'll gain: Duration: 10 Months MIT xPRO CERT-MIT xPRO PGC in Cybersecurity Starts on undefined Get Details RJD MP Manoj Jha , also a petitioner, has termed the exercise unconstitutional, contending that only the Centre, not the EC, has the legal authority to determine citizenship. He warned that with the final rolls due on September 30-just weeks before elections-appeals against wrongful deletions cannot be settled before polling, depriving citizens of their right to vote. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Why seniors are rushing to get this Internet box – here's why! Techno Mag Learn More Undo Draft roll 'meaningless' without documents Calling the SIR a "grave fraud" on Bihar's voters, ADR says inclusion in the draft rolls is meaningless without mandatory document submission. It has also held ECI has given' no valid reason' for exclusion of Aadhar, EPIC, and ration card from the list of documents. Citing ground surveys, including from Bharat Jodo Abhiyan, ADR says fewer than half of Bihar's 18-40 age group hold the EC-specified eligibility documents. With polls expected in October-November, many voters either without documents or missing from the draft roll will have no time to secure inclusion. The impact of deletions will be more severe if clusters of migrant voters are concentrated in a few constituencies, ADR warns. ERO 'unchecked discretion' ADR also challenges the procedure for EROs, who must verify each elector's inclusion or exclusion from August 1. It says the June 24 SIR order lacks a defined process for scrutinising forms or verifying supporting documents, giving EROs "broad, unchecked discretion" and risking large-scale disenfranchisement. Live Events A single ERO is expected to handle forms for over three lakh people, making due diligence "humanly impossible". With little time to hear appeals before final roll publication, voters in the midst of appeals risk being excluded and losing their franchise. Elector-adult ratio drops ADR points to a sharp drop in Bihar's elector-to-adult population ratio-from 102% in 2019 to 97% in 2024-signalling under-enfranchisement. With Bihar's adult population projected at 8.18 crore in July 2025, maintaining the 97% ratio should yield a roll of at least 7.93 crore. "Instead, SIR has slashed the figure further, bringing the total to just 7.24 crore. That leaves 94 lakh eligible adults off the draft electoral rolls ," ADR's rejoinder says.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
6 days ago
- Politics
- Business Standard
EC's refusal to accept Aadhaar as voter ID in Bihar is 'absurd': ADR
The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) has told the Supreme Court that the Election Commission's (EC) claim of having constitutional powers to verify voters' citizenship during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls contradicts earlier court rulings. According to a report by The Indian Express, ADR also criticised the EC for excluding Aadhaar and ration cards as acceptable proof of identity, calling the move 'patently absurd,' especially as Aadhaar is widely used for passports, caste certificates, and permanent residency documents. 'Grave fraud' in rush to revise rolls The ADR, the petitioner in the matter, argued that the EC has not provided valid reasons for hurrying through the revision ahead of Bihar's Assembly polls. The group described the process as a 'grave fraud' on the state's electorate. The revision exercise, announced on June 24, has been controversial due to its timing and new requirement that voters registered after 2003 must provide several documents to stay on the electoral rolls. This has raised fears that many legitimate voters could be disenfranchised. ADR has submitted its response to the EC's affidavit, filed on July 21. In that affidavit, the EC claimed that Article 326 of the Constitution permits it to verify the citizenship of voters and clarified that being removed from the electoral roll does not mean loss of citizenship. The matter will be heard next on 28 July. Citizenship verification against court judgments? ADR argued that the EC's claim of authority to verify citizenship goes against earlier Supreme Court decisions. It cited Lal Babu Hussain vs Union of India (1995), which stated that the burden of proving citizenship lies with new applicants, not existing voters. It also referenced Inderjit Barua vs ECI (1985), where the court held that being on the electoral roll is strong proof of citizenship, and the onus to disprove it lies with those who object. ADR criticised the EC's directive requiring voters added after 2003 to produce one of 11 specified documents, saying this wrongly shifts the burden of proof to voters. 'It is submitted that the SIR process shifts the onus of citizenship proof on all existing electors in a state, whose names were registered by the ECI through a due process,' ADR said. The group questioned why the existing legal procedures under the Representation of the People Act and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 had to be replaced with a fresh set of documentation and a new form. ADR also said the EC had not provided any data showing foreign nationals or illegal migrants had been included in the electoral rolls. EC's Aadhaar rejection 'absurd' In its July 21 affidavit, the EC refused to accept the Supreme Court's suggestion to include Aadhaar, ration cards, and Voter ID as valid documents, arguing that Aadhaar and ration cards can be obtained using false papers. ADR countered that the EC's list of 11 acceptable documents is also open to fraud. It added, 'The fact that Aadhaar card is one of the documents accepted for obtaining Permanent Residence Certificate, OBC/SC/ST Certificate and for passport – makes ECI's rejection of Aadhar (which is most widely held document) under the instant SIR order patently absurd.' 'Violations' by officials ADR alleged that EC officials on the ground are not following the Commission's own rules. The June 24 guidelines required Block Level Officers (BLOs) to visit each home and provide two forms per voter. But ADR said many voters had not met any BLOs and had not signed any forms, yet their submissions were recorded online. 'Forms of even dead individuals have been reported to have been submitted,' it added. ADR also criticised the lack of a clear process for verifying these forms and documents, saying this gave Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) excessive powers that could lead to widespread disenfranchisement. Why target post-2003 voters? The EC's order says that the 2003 electoral roll is proof of citizenship for voters already registered. For those born after July 1, 1987, the EC asks for proof of citizenship from at least one parent. If the parent appears on the 2003 roll, the child may rely on that. ADR said this distinction was unfair and placed those registered after 2003 at 'a larger risk of disenfranchisement.' It also questioned why the EC had not submitted the 2003 revision order to the Court and asked for it to be produced. In contrast, during the 2004 revision exercise in the North East, only new voters had to submit documents, and that process took over six months (July 1, 2004 to January 3, 2005). In Bihar, the entire process is being compressed into three months -- from June 25 to September 30. 2025 roll already revised ADR also asked why a fresh revision is needed when the 2025 electoral roll was already updated and published in January this year. The group said the roll is regularly updated to account for deaths, migration, and other changes. ADR also highlighted an August 11, 2023 EC circular to state CEOs, directing them to delete names of electors who had died, moved, or were duplicates. The EC claimed the current SIR was being held in response to concerns raised by political parties. But ADR said, 'not a single political party had asked ECI for a de novo exercise such as the one prescribed in the instant SIR order'. Instead, parties had raised concerns about fake votes being added, genuine opposition voters being deleted, and irregular voting after polls had closed. Supreme Court's interim observations The case was first heard on July 10 by a vacation bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi. While the Court did not halt the process, it suggested the EC consider allowing Aadhaar, Voter ID, and ration cards as valid documents, in addition to the 11 listed. The EC was told to submit its affidavit by July 21, and the matter will be heard again on July 28. As of Friday, the EC said it had received forms from 72.3 million voters for inclusion in the draft roll. Around 6.5 million names are to be deleted due to death, permanent migration, duplicate entries, or because the voter was untraceable. Further deletions may occur after the draft roll is published. Between August 1 and September 1, those whose names are missing from the draft will be able to file claims and objections.
Indian Express
6 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
‘Grave fraud on voters': EC's citizenship verification in Bihar roll revision defies past SC judgments, says ADR
The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), in its reply to the Election Commission's counter in the Supreme Court, has argued that the poll body's claim of having the constitutional authority to verify voters' citizenship during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls flies in the face of past judgments. It also called the exclusion of Aadhaar and ration cards from the list of acceptable documents 'patently absurd,' noting that Aadhaar is widely accepted when applying for passports, caste certificates, and permanent residence documents. The petitioner further said the EC had failed to justify why the revision exercise must be rushed ahead of the upcoming Assembly elections, describing the manner in which it is being conducted as a 'grave fraud' on the state's voters. Announced on June 24, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls has sparked controversy over both its timing and the requirement that voters enrolled after 2003 produce multiple documents to stay on the rolls, raising concerns about the potential disenfranchisement of a large number of electors and, eventually, prompting legal challenges in the SC. Acting on the Court's directions, ADR — a non-profit that works on electoral reforms — filed its rejoinder on Saturday to the Commission's counter-affidavit submitted on July 21. In that filing, the Commission had argued that under Article 326 of the Constitution it is within its rights to verify the citizenship of electors, and clarified that removal from the electoral rolls does not amount to termination of an individual's citizenship. The matter is next listed for hearing on July 28. Responding to the EC's argument that it has the authority to verify voters' citizenship, the petitioner said this contradicted previous Supreme Court rulings, including Lal Babu Hussain vs Union of India (1995), which held that the burden of proving citizenship lies with new applicants, not those already on the rolls. ADR also cited Inderjit Barua vs ECI (1985), where the Court held that being listed on the electoral roll was prima facie proof of citizenship, and the burden of disproving it rested with the objector. The rejoinder pointed to the Commission's instructions for the Bihar leg of the SIR, which require all voters added after 2003 to submit documents from a list of 11 prescribed by the EC, effectively putting the onus on post-2003 electors to prove their eligibility, including age and citizenship. '…It is submitted that the SIR process shifts the onus of citizenship proof on all existing electors in a state, whose names were registered by the ECI through a due process,' ADR submitted. It argued that the Commission had not explained why the established process under the RP Act and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 had to be replaced with fresh documentation requirements and a new enumeration form. Nor, ADR added, had the Commission furnished any data on complaints about foreign nationals or illegal migrants being included on the rolls. The poll body, in its July 21 affidavit, did not accept the apex court's suggestion to consider Aadhaar, Voter ID, and ration cards as valid proof for the ongoing intensive revision in Bihar, arguing that Aadhaar and ration cards can be obtained through fraudulent or falsified documentation. In its rejoinder, the NGO said that the 11 documents originally prescribed by the EC are equally susceptible to being procured using fake or false documentation. 'The fact that Aadhar card is one of the documents accepted for obtaining Permanent Residence Certificate, OBC/SC/ST Certificate and for passport – makes ECI's rejection of Aadhar (which is most widely held document) under the instant SIR order patently absurd,' it added. Calling the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) a 'grave fraud on the voters of Bihar,' ADR said reports from the ground suggest that the Commission's own June 24 guidelines are being violated Block Level Officers (BLOs). As per the order, BLOs were required to visit each home and give each elector two forms. 'Many voters have reported that their forms have been submitted online, despite never having met with any BLOs or signed any documents. Forms of even dead individuals have been reported to have been submitted,' the rejoinder alleged. ADR also flagged the lack of any clear procedure for scrutiny of the enumeration forms or verification of documents, arguing that this has handed Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) 'arbitrary, unbridled and excessive discretionary powers, which can disenfranchise a huge percentage of population in Bihar.' The June 24 EC order had stated that the last intensive revision in Bihar was conducted in 2003, and that the 2003 roll would serve as 'probative evidence' of citizenship for existing electors. For electors born after July 1, 1987, the EC required proof of citizenship of at least one parent, though it allowed them to rely on the 2003 roll if their parents were on it. ADR, however, questioned this distinction, arguing that it puts electors registered after 2003 at 'a larger risk of disenfranchisement.' It also questioned why the ECI had not placed on record the order of the 2003 revision and asked the court to direct it to do so. In the case of a 2004 order for intensive revision in North East states, which is available publicly, only new electors were asked to supply documents. The 2004 exercise was conducted over six months (July 1, 2004 to January 3, 2005), while the Bihar roll is being revised within a three-month window from June 25 to September 30, it said. The petitioner added that the EC had not explained why the SIR must be completed before the Bihar Assembly elections, or why the 2025 electoral roll, which underwent revision and was published in January, cannot be used for the upcoming polls. ADR argued that updating the electoral roll is a continuous process that already accounts for migration, deaths, and other demographic changes. It cited a January 7 press release by the Bihar Chief Electoral Officer, which noted that the Special Summary Revision 2025 was conducted on the EC's directions and had resulted in the addition of 12.03 lakh names and the deletion of 4.09 lakh. ADR also referred to the EC's instruction dated August 11, 2023, directing Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs) of all states and Union Territories to delete names from the rolls in cases of shifting, demographic similar entries (DSEs), and death. In its counter, EC had said that the SIR was being held to address the concerns of political parties. To this, ADR said 'not a single political party had asked ECI for a de novo exercise such as the one prescribed in the instant SIR order. The concerns of political parties were on the issue of addition of non-existent votes and deletion of genuine votes supporting the opposition parties and on the issue of casting of votes after closure of polls.' The legal challenge to the Bihar SIR was first heard on July 10 by a two-judge vacation bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi. While the Supreme Court declined to restrain the Election Commission from going ahead with the exercise, it suggested that the poll panel also consider accepting Aadhaar, voter ID, and ration cards — in addition to the list of 11 prescribed documents — for updating the rolls. The Court allowed the Commission to file a counter-affidavit by July 21 and listed the matter for a further hearing on July 28. By Friday, the Commission's deadline for collecting enumeration forms had passed. The EC said it had received forms from 7.23 crore electors, who would be included in the draft electoral roll. Around 65 lakh names would be deleted, as those electors were found to have died, shifted permanently, been enrolled in two places, or were untraceable, the poll panel said. Additional deletions may follow after the draft roll is published, as documents submitted by the 7.23 crore electors will be scrutinised before the final roll is released on September 30. Those excluded from the draft roll will have the opportunity to file claims and objections between August 1 and September 1. Damini Nath is an Assistant Editor with the national bureau of The Indian Express. She covers the housing and urban affairs and Election Commission beats. She has 11 years of experience as a reporter and sub-editor. Before joining The Indian Express in 2022, she was a reporter with The Hindu's national bureau covering culture, social justice, housing and urban affairs and the Election Commission. ... Read More
