SIR for ECI

The Election Commission of India (ECI) is once again walking a fine line between reform and repression. Its latest nationwide initiative-the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls- promises to “purify” voter lists by removing duplicates, the deceased, and those who have permanently shifted, while adding new eligible voters. However, after what transpired in Bihar, where the pilot version of this exercise sparked outrage and suspicion, the ECI’s promise of purity sounds less like a civic correction and more like a calculated purge. In Bihar, the so-called verification drive turned into a bureaucratic nightmare. Voters enrolled after 2003 were forced to produce multiple documents to prove birth and residency-requirements that, on the surface, appear routine but, in practice, disproportionately punish the poor, migrants, and those without stable housing. The ECI’s rigid insistence on who qualifies as an “ordinarily resident” threatens to erase millions of working-class Indians from the rolls-people who live between cities for survival but still hold their home constituencies close to heart. Let’s not pretend this is an innocent clerical update. The Supreme Court itself had to intervene, asking the ECI to widen the scope of acceptable documents, including Aadhaar, for verifying residency. The Court also demanded that the ECI disclose the number and identity of those removed from the lists in Bihar. Yet the Commission’s refusal to publish a detailed breakdown of deletions raises a red flag. Why the secrecy, if the motive is transparency? What is the ECI afraid the numbers will reveal? Critics have rightly compared this exercise to a “stealth NRC,” warning that the SIR could become a political weapon disguised as an administrative reform.By imposing excessive documentation requirements, the ECI risks disenfranchising those least able to defend themselves-the poor, the migrants, and minority groups. The echoes are unmistakable: selective exclusion wrapped in the rhetoric of cleansing. Political observers see more than coincidence in the timing and method of the revision. In states where migrant laborers form a significant voting bloc-often leaning toward opposition parties-the possibility of mass deletions cannot be dismissed as an accident. When voter verification starts looking like voter elimination, the Commission’s neutrality stands on trial. The ECI insists the SIR is about “cleaning” the rolls, not politics. But credibility cannot be demanded; it must be earned. By conducting the Bihar pilot in secrecy and withholding crucial data, the Commission has undermined the very trust it is meant to protect. Transparency and fairness are not optional-they are the foundation of democracy. A clean voter list is vital, yes-but a fair one is non-negotiable. The ECI must remember that its duty is not to serve political convenience but to safeguard the people’s mandate. When the exercise of cleansing begins to smell of control, democracy itself becomes the casualty. If the ECI truly wishes to prove its independence, it must open the process to public scrutiny-because in a democracy, no one, not even the Election Commission, should be above accountability.