Presumed guilty, SIR’s spreading stain

According to this newspaper's investigation, four booths in the Godda district of Jharkhand have sparked concerns about the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. These booths exhibit a disturbing pattern where BJP workers submit Form 7s in bulk, seeking the deletion of names from the draft rolls. The Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, allow for objections to proposed inclusions, existing names, or requests for deletion through Form 7.

The source highlights that these bulk objections by BJP workers not only violate procedural rules but also raise the serious concern of targeted deletion of minority voters. Many individuals marked for deletion had submitted the required documents, lived in the same house for generations, or were already included in the 2003 rolls.

An inquiry ordered after the newspaper's report cannot be the end of the matter, as the SIR has increasingly appeared to facilitate harassment and disenfranchisement of vulnerable voters. Nationwide, the SIR has led to 13 crore deletions, placing the burden of proof on voters and demanding difficult-to-access documents. The process often imposes unrealistic deadlines, making the process itself a punishment for voters.

The source attributes some responsibility to the Supreme Court for not asking enough questions of the Election Commission (EC) and adopting an institutional autonomy approach. The Bengal appellate process, involving micro-observers, judicial officers, and 19 appellate tribunals, extends beyond the election timeline, leaving excluded individuals uncertain about their future.

The source concludes that the SIR has become an exercise that puts voters on trial, rather than simply cleaning electoral rolls, and the EC and the Supreme Court must consider if they will allow this flawed process to tarnish their legacy.