General
Synopsis
The Supreme Court has instructed the Election Commission of India to release the list of approximately 65 lakh names that were removed from Bihar’s electoral draft roll after a special revision.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to publish the list of about 65 lakh names omitted from the electoral draft roll published on August 1 after a special intensive revision (SIR) exercise in poll-bound Bihar.
Directing the commission to upload the list online, a bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi also directed ECI to supply booth-wise searchable lists of the omitted voters with reasons. The commission has been directed to display the same on notice boards of panchayat bhavans/block development offices.
The poll body has been directed to publish the searchable list in district electoral officers’ websites by 5 pm on August 19. The case will come up for resumed hearing on August 22.
To provide easy manual access to electors, the bench ordered that physical lists with reasons for omission shall also be displayed on the notice boards of booth-level officers and block development/panchayat offices.
Wide publicity
The Bihar chief electoral officer shall get soft copies of the list with reasons to be displayed on his website, and wide publicity shall be given through regional and English newspapers, radio (including All India radio), TV (including Doordarshan) and authorised social media platforms of Election Commission of India, the bench ordered.
The court also directed that the public notice about the display will specifically mention that objections can be raised by aggrieved individuals along with their Aadhaar copy, which shall be considered as a proof of identity and residence.
It might be mentioned here that ECI, so far, has resisted accepting Aadhaar, contending that while it may be a proof of identity, it is not a valid proof of citizenship.
VOTERS’ FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT
During the resumed hearing on Thursday, the bench told the counsel for ECI that voters have a “fundamental right” to know why their names have been deleted from the draft roll. The same requires “widest publicity”, justice Bagchi orally remarked.
He added “it is a fact there is a departure from your (ECI) SOP” owing to the exception of a “special circumstance”. But, the judge added “why put data on the click of an inquiry”. Put the entire data on the website”.
‘PROCEDURE MUST BE FAIR’
Weighing in, justice Kant verbally observed “we don’t want citizen rights to be dependent on political parties”. He added “why should a local villager be at the mercy of a BLO (booth-level officer)? These are practical impediments”.
Justice Kant further remarked that voters should not be made to run behind political parties to enquire about the status of their inclusion/exclusion from the roll. Justice Kant further said that the procedure adopted by the commission has to be “fair” since it has the “consequence of disenfranchising a voter”.
ECI COUNSEL ON OPPN
The counsel for ECI argued that the commission has recently been facing sharp “political hostility”. He added there is “hardly any matter on which there is congruence” with the Opposition. He added that there had been repeated challenges to EVM. Referring to the Opposition, the ECI counsel said “if you win in one state, EVM is good. And when you lose in another, EVM is bad. Today we are at the same crossroads. Democracy is such that political parties will have necessities to raise certain issues”.