EDITORIAL 1: A test of trust
Introduction
Free and fair elections are the lifeblood of a democracy, and the electoral roll is its very foundation. Without an accurate, inclusive and credible roll, the process risks being undermined at its very start. In a country as large and diverse as India, where the electorate exceeds 960 million, the preparation and continuous updating of electoral rolls is an extraordinary logistical and democratic exercise. It is through these rolls that the principle of “one person, one vote” is given practical shape.
Role of ECI
- The Election Commission of India (ECI), constitutionally mandated to conduct free and fair elections, has over the decades placed emphasis on the integrity of the electoral roll.
- The Supreme Court has repeatedly underscored this, holding that free and fair elections form part of the basic structure of the Constitution, and that accurate voter lists are integral to that process.
- Transparency has long been the ECI’s guiding principle. From making draft rolls publicly available for claims and objections, to deploying technology for online search, to inviting political parties and civil society to participate in verification drives, the ECI has tried to keep the process open to scrutiny.
- For decades, this openness was a source of immense public trust. Surveys by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) through the 1990s and 2000s consistently found trust levels in the ECI to be among the highest for any public institution, often exceeding 75-80 per cent.
The current scenario
- The current Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Bihar is ostensibly part of this tradition. Through the SIR, the ECI aims to capture new voters, correct errors, and remove ineligible names through a de novo process.
- Around 2003-4, the ECI had taken a decision to stop making voter rolls de novo as by then most state rolls had been digitised and electronic voter cards distributed.
- This practice was followed by successive Commissions. Even the present Commission conducted the 2024 general elections with a summary revision, which meant that the existent rolls were cross-checked by door-to-door visits and additions and deletions made.
- The trust the ECI once commanded almost unquestioningly is now under greater public scrutiny.
- Allegations of executive overreach, perceived inaction in the face of violations, and reduced transparency have prompted debates about whether the institution is as fiercely independent as before.
- While the procedural architecture for transparency — such as draft roll publication, booth-level officer verification, and stakeholder consultation — remains in place, the perception of impartiality is as important as its reality. Reinforcing this trust is as crucial as ensuring technical accuracy.
- In the current SIR, the Commission has released a granular breakdown of deletions: About 65 lakh names removed, including 22 lakh deceased voters, 36 lakh permanently shifted or untraceable individuals, and 7 lakh duplicates. This precision in identifying and removing inaccuracies is laudable.
- However, the number of new voters added after this clean-up has not been made public — leaving an incomplete picture of the revision’s net effect. That is a serious omission, as the addition of bogus voters is a perennial complaint.
Way forward
- For an organisation that has built its reputation as one of the most respected election management bodies in the world, returning to its fullest, most uncompromising version of transparency is not just desirable — it is necessary for the preservation of democratic trust.
- If the ECI truly believes “every vote matters”, it must prove it by showing every voter it has added — not just every name it has removed, and every duplicate voter it has detected.