After Bihar, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has now embarked on a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in 12 States and Union Territories. Its stated goal is unambiguous — to update the rolls which have been affected by frequent migration, dead voters and other inaccuracies, which have been pointed out by political parties, the Congress in particular. Yet, the experience in Bihar suggests that the process, as envisaged, could risk the disenfranchisement of a significant number of people. It was conducted on a short timeline — roughly a month for enumeration and a month for claims and objections. The most significant change now is the formal provision of a “Notice period” for hearing and verification for about 54 days. The hurried approach in Bihar produced glaring statistical anomalies in the final roll. The gender ratio fell to 892 women per 1,000 men from 907 in the pre-SIR roll — well below recent survey figures for Bihar. Women voters were disproportionately excluded in areas with higher female than male turnout in the general election 2024, particularly in the 18-29 age group under the “permanently shifted” category. High female turnout relative to low registration typically indicates male migration, yet more women were deleted despite the SIR’s stated aim to remove migrants not “ordinarily resident”.
These anomalies seem to be built into the ECI’s procedural framework, where the primary onus of verification is unduly borne by citizens and party representatives — Booth Level Agents — beyond Booth Level Officers. Expecting members from parties to ensure the inclusion of all eligible voters is problematic as they are more concerned about political competition. The ECI’s non-response to the anomalies — anyone left out can re-register with the help of BLAs — is inadequate. After the Supreme Court’s intervention, the ECI had to publish lists of all excluded voters with reasons, leading to some correction. An amended model is now being replicated across a larger canvas. While the ECI’s provision for BLOs to make three house visits is welcome, temporary migrants who might be absent during the enumeration window despite remaining “ordinarily resident” by law, could still lose out. The ECI’s stated mitigation, allowing electors to fill the Enumeration Form online, is insufficient. This provision overlooks the digital divide and literacy challenges, placing an undue burden on voters who are not physically present to be assisted by a BLO. As this exercise unfolds, it is incumbent upon civil society, the media and parties to assume a role of intense vigilance lest this affects the integrity of India’s electoral democracy.