Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, Aug 22: A Supreme Court Bench, which heard a plea against the “Special Intensive Revision” (SIR) exercise carried out by the Election Commission of India (ECI) in poll-bound Bihar, on Friday refused to alter the current programme but suggested the poll body to extend the timeline in case of overwhelming responses while instructing the political parties to direct their booth-level agents to assist voters to file claims and objections in the draft rolls.
Posting the next hearing for September 8, the Bench remarked it was “surprised” that the political parties didn’t take it up earlier. The apex court also allowed persons excluded from the draft electoral roll to submit their applications for inclusion through online mode can present the Aadhaar card as proof of residence or using any of the eleven government-issued documents mentioned by the ECI.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi asked 12 recognised political parties in Bihar to instruct their Booth Level Agents (BLAs) to assist the persons in their respective booths for the submission of the forms and file a status report by September 8.
The top court also expressed surprise over the fact that only two objections have come from about 1.6 lakh Booth Level Agents of political parties. “On the other hand, some political parties submitted that the BLAs are not being permitted to submit their objections,” the Court noted.
The excluded voters – numbering around 35 lakh people, the court estimated after deducting the number of those said to be dead and duplicate entries – however, were told to hurry up. Justice Surya Kant directed the filing of all documents to be completed by September 1. This, though, can be completed online, a bench that included Justice Joymalya Bagchi said.
The top court – hearing petitions contesting the ‘special intensive revision’ of the voter list – said applications for re-inclusion can be submitted with either one of those 11 or the Aadhaar. The court also had some strong comments for political parties in Bihar, demanding to know why they – many of whom have opposed the revision on grounds it was ‘designed to disenfranchise’ communities that usually vote for them – had not assisted lakhs in trying to get back on the list.
The apex court also commended the Election Commission’s efforts to conduct the SIR, noting that the exercise was aimed at “inclusion” of voters.
Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the ECI, said none of the 12 recognised political parties in the State have given any objections and informed that over 2 lakh forms have been filed by new voters for inclusion in the list. “They are only whipping up fear for their political interests… It is the duty of the political parties to come forward and assist the Election Commission in completing this exercise. But they are not cooperating,” Dwivedi said.
Dwivedi urged the court to give the ECI a 15-day window to show there was no exclusion. “The political parties are making hue and cry and things are not bad. Repose faith in us and give us some more time. We will be able to show you there are no exclusions,” Dwivedi said. The poll body also told the court around 85,000 voters excluded in draft rolls had moved for re-inclusion and more than two lakh new voters had come forward to register their names.
The revision of the voters’ list in Bihar–the first since 2003–has sparked a huge political row. The SIR’s findings have reduced the total number of 7.9 crore registered voters in Bihar, from before the exercise, to 7.24 crore. The Election Commission on Monday came out with the names of 65 lakh people who were removed from the draft electoral rolls.
“Political parties are not doing their jobs…” the court said, echoing the poll panel’s note that objections had filed been by individual politicians, i.e., MPs and MLAs, but not the parties.” We are surprised at what political parties are doing in Bihar. What are your BLAs (booth-level agents) doing? Political parties must help voters,” the court said after being told that only two objections – to exclusions of voters – had come from over 1.6 lakh BLAs from parties.
There was a note that some poll officials were not acknowledging BLAs’ objections. To counter this, the court said acknowledgment receipts had to be offered when forms are submitted. “This problem is beyond 65 lakh people,” Advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for one of the petitioners, said. “But we are only surprised by the inaction of parties. After appointing BLAs, what have they been doing?” the court replied, “Why there is a distance to the people?”
The EC then noted that BLAs were authorised to file 10 enumeration forms, i.e., on behalf of struck-off voters, per day, and that individual voters had been more active in filing objections to deletion of their names than political parties that had cried foul over the revision exercise.
Welcoming the Supreme Court directive on the Bihar SIR issue, the Congress on Friday said democracy has survived a “brutal assault” from the ECI and claimed that the poll body stands “totally exposed and discredited.” The opposition party said the Supreme Court has laid down guardrails to make the revision more inclusive by including political parties in the process, and alleged that so far, the ECI’s approach has been “obstructionist and contrary to the interests of the voters.”
Advocate Nizam Pasha for AIMIM said the ECI should publish what documents were filed by the voters, based on which or lack of which, their names were excluded. Advocate Vrinda Grover, representing an NGO, argued that the situation on the ground in Bihar was that Election Commission was insisting on one of the 11 indicative documents despite the court order to allow Aadhaar. Prashant Bhushan complained that voters asked by the Electoral Revision Officers (EROs) to file Form 6 declaration, and that Aadhaar alone would not do. One of the 11 documents have to be filed, he said.
