Discrepancies In Electoral Roll

At a time when Nagaland’s electorate would ordinarily be expected to grow with population, migration and the entry of young citizens into the voting age group, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) has produced a development that demands close public scrutiny. The draft electoral roll published on September 20 has dropped by 1,50,751 names from the pre-SIR roll, while nearly five lakh electors could face notices over discrepancies in mapping their details with the 2005 electoral roll. The figures are substantial enough to raise questions without prejudging the exercise. Of the 13,57,208 electors in the pre-SIR roll, 11,99,456, or 88.38 per cent, submitted Enumeration Forms during the August 16 to September 14 house-to-house enumeration. The exercise identified 28,944 deceased electors, 1,23,749 persons categorised as absent, permanently shifted or under other categories, and 5,059 duplicate or multiple enrolments. Together, these categories account for the 1,57,752 entries that were not carried into the draft roll. There is a legitimate administrative purpose behind removing dead, shifted and duplicate entries. An electoral roll must reflect actual eligible voters and should not contain multiple registrations. The Election Department is also correct in stating that the draft roll is not the final roll and that genuine electors omitted at this stage can seek inclusion during the claims and objections period. The official process provides from September 20 to October 20 for claims and objections, followed by scrutiny and disposal of cases. However, the mapping issue introduces a much larger concern. According to the Additional Chief Electoral Officer, 9.33 per cent of electors have been placed in the “no mapping” category and another 27.31 per cent under mapping anomalies. Together, that is 36.64 per cent of the electorate, translating into nearly five lakh people. Such a large proportion cannot simply be treated as a technical footnote. Mapping present electors with the 2005 roll may help establish continuity of electoral records, but a mismatch should not automatically become a presumption against citizenship or eligibility. This is particularly important in Nagaland, where families have moved between villages and towns, records may be incomplete, names may have changed over generations and documentation may not always follow people through every stage of their lives. The Election Department has said that electors whose records cannot be linked or where discrepancies are detected will receive notices and be given an opportunity to submit supporting documents. No name in the draft roll, it says, will be deleted without notice, enquiry and a reasonable opportunity to be heard. That assurance must now be matched by transparent implementation. The burden on ordinary citizens cannot be underestimated when nearly five lakh people may enter the notice and scrutiny process. Every notice must clearly explain the discrepancy, the documents required and the procedure for responding. EROs must also ensure that elderly people, persons living in remote areas and citizens unfamiliar with the documentation process are not effectively excluded through procedural complexity. The public must equally resist the temptation to interpret every deletion as wrongful or every discrepancy as evidence of wrongdoing. The enumeration has identified categories that plainly require correction. What matters now is whether the correction process is accurate, transparent and accessible. The claims and objections stage therefore becomes the real test of the SIR. Citizens must check the draft roll, political parties and civil society organisations should assist in identifying genuine omissions, and election officials must scrutinise every objection without bias.The final electoral roll is scheduled for publication on November 22.