IAS/UPSC Coaching Institute  

08 Jan 2026 : Letter against the spirit

 Editorial 2: ​​Letter against the spirit

Context

The Election Commission of India is mandated to ensure that no Indian citizen is denied the right to vote.

 

Introduction

The debate surrounding the Election Commission of India (ECI) and its Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls has raised fundamental questions about constitutional duty, democratic fairness, and citizen rights. While ensuring that only Indian citizens vote is essential, the process adopted and its impact on ordinary voters lie at the heart of the current controversy.

 

ECI’s Position Before the Supreme Court

  • The Election Commission of India (ECI) informed the Supreme Court of India that it carries a constitutional responsibility to ensure that only Indian citizens are included in electoral rolls.
  • The ECI stated that not even a single foreigner can be permitted on the voter list.
  • This submission was made on January 6, in defence of the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
  • The SIR exercise has led to the deletion of millions of voter names.

 

Concerns Raised by Opposition and Civil Society

  • Opposition parties, legal experts, and civil society groups have expressed serious concerns about:
    • The burden placed on ordinary citizens.
    • Harassment and inconvenience caused by repeated demands to prove identity and citizenship.
  • Notably:
    • No group has argued for the inclusion of foreigners.
    • There is broad agreement that current electoral rolls require correction, as they are faulty and difficult to navigate.

 

Core Issue: Constitutional Duty vs Procedural Approach

  • The key issue lies in the process adopted, not in the objective itself.
  • Historically, the ECI has:
    • Built institutional credibility.
    • Expanded the right to vote as a substantive democratic right, not a mere administrative formality.
  • The present approach risks undermining this legacy.

 

Democratic and Ethical Concerns

  • The principle that no innocent individual should suffer to identify wrongdoers is relevant here.
  • Excessive focus on the fear of foreigners risks:
    • Distracting attention from genuine threats to electoral integrity.
    • Contributing to political polarisation.

 

Constitutional Authority and Public Confidence

  • It is undisputed that Article 324 grants the ECI independent control over the preparation of electoral rolls.
  • The concern is whether this power is being exercised:
    • Independently and impartially.
    • In a way that strengthens public trust in elections.

 

The Litmus Test of a Fair Electoral Process

  • A credible electoral system is one where:
    • Even those who lose elections continue to trust the process.
  • Currently:
    • The ECI appears to prioritise removal of foreigners over enrolment of all eligible citizens.
    • This reflects a misalignment of constitutional priorities.

 

Unique Responsibility of the ECI

  • Several authorities may be tasked with identifying foreign nationals.
  • However:
    • Only the ECI has the constitutional duty to enrol every eligible Indian citizen as a voter.
  • Recent changes in rules and their selective application have:
    • Weakened the ECI’s credibility.
    • Diluted the sacred constitutional role assigned to it.

 

Conclusion

In pursuing the objective of excluding foreigners, the ECI risks overlooking its primary constitutional mandate of enrolling every eligible Indian citizen. A democracy survives not merely on rules, but on public trust. Electoral integrity must be safeguarded through fair, humane, and confidence-building procedures, not through measures that impose avoidable hardship on citizens.