Govt on UN Rapporteurs SIR concern: Due process followed

Why in the News

The Union government told the Rajya Sabha on 30 July that the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls was carried out by following due process of law without prejudice to any group or community. The reply came almost three months after three United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteurs wrote to the government raising concern over large scale deletion of electors and alleged discrimination through the exercise.

How does the Special Intensive Revision work?

1. Enumeration: Booth level officers distribute and collect enumeration forms from every elector in the area under revision, requiring proof of citizenship, age and ordinary residence rather than relying only on the existing electoral roll entry.
2. Draft roll: Once forms are collected and verified, the Election Commission of India (ECI) publishes a draft electoral roll reflecting the revised list of electors.
3. Claims and objections: Electors and political parties can file claims for inclusion or objections to entries during a specified window before the roll is finalised.
4. Final roll: The ECI publishes the final electoral roll after disposing of claims and objections, and this roll is used for elections held after that date.

Who are UN Special Rapporteurs?

1. Independent experts appointed by the UN Human Rights Council to examine and report on specific human rights themes or country situations.
2. They do not represent the UN as an institution, and their communications, including the one on the SIR, carry no binding legal authority over member states.

What did the Special Rapporteurs allege?

1. Scale of deletion: The communication raised concern over large scale deletion of electors from the rolls during the SIR exercise.
2. Discrimination claim: It alleged the exercise had a discriminatory effect on specific groups or communities.
3. Delay in response: The government’s reply came nearly three months after the communication was received, and only after the matter was raised in the Rajya Sabha.

Why is a due process claim not enough to settle the matter?

1. No numbers offered: The government’s reply asserted due process was followed but did not place before Parliament the actual scale of deletions the Special Rapporteurs had flagged.
2. Parallel legal challenges: The same deletions remain under separate examination in pending petitions before the Supreme Court, meaning the due process claim is being tested in a forum whose outcome is still open.
3. International scrutiny continues: A reply to Parliament does not close the UN communication, which remains part of the Human Rights Council’s special procedures record regardless of the government’s domestic response.
4. Verification burden: Requiring citizenship and residence documents from every elector shifts the burden of proof onto individuals, affecting poor, migrant and undocumented voters more than others, the groups the Special Rapporteurs’ discrimination claim centres on.

What are the challenges to the Special Intensive Revision?

1. Documentation burden: Migrant workers, the poor and the elderly are least likely to hold the specific documents demanded, raising the risk of wrongful exclusion rather than genuine deduplication.
2. Timeline pressure: Conducting a house to house enumeration across a state within a compressed window increases the chance of errors by booth level officers working under time pressure.
3. Appeal window adequacy: A short claims and objections period limits the time available for a wrongly excluded elector to be restored to the rolls before an election is notified.
4. Judicial pendency: With petitions challenging the SIR still pending before the Supreme Court, the exercise continues in several states even as its legal validity remains undecided.
5. Reputational cost: Simultaneous scrutiny from Parliament, the courts and UN human rights mechanisms complicates the government’s ability to present the exercise as procedurally settled.

Conclusion

The government’s due process claim does not resolve the dispute over the SIR. The scale of the deletions remains undisclosed, petitions challenging the exercise remain pending before the Supreme Court, and the UN communication remains on record with no reply addressing its specific numbers. The next milestone is the Supreme Court’s disposal of the pending petitions, which will determine whether the due process claim withstands judicial scrutiny.

Back2Basics:

Special Intensive Revision (SIR)

1. An intensive, house to house revision of electoral rolls conducted by the Election Commission of India under its powers over preparation and revision of electoral rolls, distinct from the routine annual summary revision.
2. Requires fresh verification of every elector’s citizenship, age and ordinary residence rather than a review limited to additions and deletions since the last roll.
3. The current round began in Bihar and has since been extended to other states ahead of scheduled elections.
4. Political parties and civil society groups have challenged aspects of the exercise before the Supreme Court, citing the risk of wrongful deletion.

Special Summary Revision (SSR)

1. SSR is the routine, annual exercise conducted by the ECI to update existing voter lists.
2. How it works : Unlike SIR, it does not mandate a door-to-door check for every single person. It mostly relies on citizens voluntarily submitting online or offline applications for fresh registration, deletion, or corrections.
3. Purpose : Accommodating newly eligible young voters (who just turned 18) and making minor changes before an ordinary election cycle.

Continuous Revision (CR)

1. Continuous revision runs constantly between the conclusion of a summary revision and the announcement of the next major election.
2. How it works : The voter list remains open dynamically. Eligible citizens can use the ECI’s Voter Service Portal or Voter Helpline App to update their addresses or register at any point in the year

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2024] Examine the need for electoral reforms as suggested by various committees with particular reference to “one nation-one election” principle.

Linkage: The PYQ examines electoral reforms and measures to strengthen the integrity of the electoral process. The article analyses the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), highlighting concerns over voter roll verification, inclusion, and electoral fairness.