The Critical Flaws in SIR Implementation: Parliamentary Concerns Over Electoral Roll Revision Process

By the time you read this, Parliament would have concluded its three-day deliberation on '150 years of Vande Mataram'. The Union government established this national song discussion as a non-negotiable prerequisite before addressing other critical matters such as electoral reforms or SIR.

Despite facing a government that frequently undermines parliamentary procedures, the Opposition remained committed to ensuring Parliament's functionality. While discussing SIR remained a top priority—particularly with 39 lives lost in Bengal alone—the Opposition demonstrated their commitment to parliamentary democracy by accepting the Government's proposed sequence for addressing these issues. As both houses proceed with their discussions, one point requires clarity: no one opposes SIR (Special Intensive Revision) conceptually or disagrees with maintaining accurate electoral rolls. The contention lies with the methodology and chaotic implementation, which raises numerous questions.

Question One: Is SIR protecting voter lists or excluding people based on identity? Of four states approaching elections—Assam, Bengal, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu—three are undergoing the SIR process while one only has a 'Simple Revision'. Notably, Assam is excluded from SIR. Additionally, border states like Meghalaya, Tripura, Mizoram, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, and Nagaland—all sharing boundaries with Bangladesh or Myanmar—aren't conducting SIR exercises. If border security (preventing infiltration) falls under agencies controlled by the Home Minister, who should be held accountable?

Question Two: Are specific states being targeted? Numerous Bengali-speaking citizens have been singularly targeted due to their mother tongue, with those speaking different Bengali dialects labeled as infiltrators. With 4,635 communities in India, each possessing distinct identities, why must these diverse identities conform to the Union Government's ill-conceived standardization?

Question Three: Will the Union Government initiate fresh elections? The Election Commission of India (ECI) now questions the reliability of the same electoral rolls used for the 2024 Lok Sabha elections and three subsequent state elections. How did these rolls suddenly become defective? If they are indeed compromised, shouldn't the Lok Sabha elected through these rolls be dissolved immediately, necessitating fresh elections?

Question Four: Who bears responsibility for the human costs? The Opposition intends to hold the government accountable for the hastily implemented SIR exercise. During peak Rabi season, thousands of farmers were forced into day-long queues. Daily-wage workers lost income while authenticating documents. Development programs in many states halted. Who will take responsibility for Block Level Officers who lost their lives due to extreme psychological and physical pressures during SIR implementation?

Question Five: Is the ECI demonstrating sufficient accountability? As a constitutional body, the ECI should function impartially and beyond reproach. However, developments in Bengal preceding Assembly elections warrant examination. For instance, the requirements for Booth Level Agents have been relaxed, allowing appointments from anywhere within the Assembly Constituency rather than from the specific electoral roll section. Additionally, an AI application identifying duplicate voters lacks transparency regarding its development, procurement, and data usage.

Seeking answers to these questions is not unpatriotic but essential for democratic integrity.

(Derek O'Brien, MP, leads the Trinamool Congress in the Rajya Sabha)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author