💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (August Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: Representation Of People’s Act

  • ‘Consider Aadhaar, EPIC, ration card as proof ’

    Why in the News?

    Recently, the Supreme Court of India has intervened in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, urging the Election Commission (EC) to consider documents like Aadhaar, EPIC, and ration cards as valid identity proof.

    Why did the SC question Aadhaar’s exclusion from voter ID documents?

    • Widespread Use for Identity Verification: The Court noted that Aadhaar is one of the most widely used and accepted documents for establishing identity in India. It questioned why Aadhaar, considered essential for obtaining various official documents, was excluded while documents like caste certificates were included.
    • Relevance to Identity, Not Citizenship: The Court emphasized that the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process is about verifying identity, not citizenship. Since Aadhaar serves that purpose effectively, its exclusion lacked justification.
    • Non-Exclusivity of Document List: The Court highlighted that the Election Commission’s list of 11 acceptable documents was not exhaustive, and in the interest of justice, Aadhaar, EPIC, and ration cards should also be considered valid for voter registration.

    What issues surround the timing and conduct of the SIR in Bihar?

    • Short and Rigid Timelines: The Supreme Court noted that the 30-day deadlines for citizens to verify and submit documents were too short, raising concerns about procedural fairness.
    • Unclear Classification of SIR: The Court observed that the Bihar SIR was neither “summary” nor “special” as defined under Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, making the exercise appear legally ambiguous.

    Why is Aadhaar controversial in proving voter citizenship?

    • Not a Proof of Citizenship: The Aadhaar Act clearly states that Aadhaar is meant for identity verification, not citizenship confirmation. It can be issued to non-citizens who are residents, which makes it unreliable as evidence for voting eligibility.
    • Risk of Inclusion Errors: Using Aadhaar may result in non-citizens being wrongly enrolled as voters due to data inaccuracies or misuse, thereby compromising the integrity of the electoral rolls.
    • High Dependence Among Marginalised Groups: In regions like Bihar, 87% of people have Aadhaar, but few possess documents like passports or matriculation certificates. If Aadhaar is excluded, vulnerable citizens risk disenfranchisement, raising concerns about equity and access.

    What are the issues related to the Adhaar Card and NPR in India? 

    • Overlap of Purpose and Confusion on Citizenship: While Aadhaar is officially a tool for identity verification and welfare delivery, and NPR is for creating a register of residents, their perceived linkage with citizenship screening (especially post-CAA debate) has led to widespread fear and confusion. Eg: During the 2020 NPR update, several states (e.g., West Bengal, Kerala) halted implementation, citing concerns over its potential use for citizenship determination.
    • Privacy and Data Security Concerns: Both Aadhaar and NPR involve massive collection of personal data, but the legal and technological safeguards for privacy and misuse remain inadequate. Aadhaar has faced leaks, while NPR has been criticised for seeking sensitive demographic data without clear purpose. Eg: In 2018, UIDAI acknowledged multiple cases where Aadhaar data was accessible through public domains or appswithout authorisation.
    • Exclusion due to Documentation Gaps: Aadhaar and NPR can inadvertently exclude individuals lacking proper documentation—especially the poor, migrants, or marginalised groups—from public services or the voter list. Eg: Reports from Jharkhand revealed cases where lack of Aadhaar linkage led to denial of PDS rations, contributing to hunger-related deaths.

    Way forward: 

    • Strengthen Legal Safeguards and Clarity: Enact clear legislative guidelines to distinguish the roles of Aadhaar, NPR, and citizenship documentation, ensuring they are not misused for exclusionary practices. A robust data protection law must accompany these measures.
    • Promote Inclusion and Transparency: Ensure all government identity and registration drives are conducted with public awareness, grievance redressal mechanisms, and opt-out provisions for vulnerable groups, to prevent exclusion and build trust in institutions.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2014] Two parallel run schemes of the Government viz. the Adhaar Card and NPR, one as voluntary and the other as compulsory, have led to debates at national levels and also litigations. On merits, discuss whether or not both schemes need run concurrently. Analyse the potential of the schemes to achieve developmental benefits and equitable growth.

    Linkage: This PYQ directly relates to the essence of the statement “Consider Aadhaar, EPIC, ration card as proof” by focusing on the Aadhaar Card and the debates and implications surrounding its use as a governmental tool.

  • [9th July 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The dark signs of restricted or selective franchise

    PYQ Relevance:

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

    Linkage: The article talks about the “Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar,” initiated on June 24, 2025, after a gap of over 20 years. This SIR is described as a “complete reconstruction of the electoral rolls” based on document submission which is directly related electoral reforms given in question.  

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  The Election Commission of India (ECI) has launched a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar, just months before the upcoming State Assembly elections in 2025. The process has drawn widespread criticism for being sudden, opaque, and document-heavy, potentially disenfranchising lakhs of eligible voters, particularly migrants, Muslims, and the poor. It is now being challenged in the Supreme Court for violating fundamental rights such as the right to vote, equality, and dignity. The issue has national implications, as similar exercises are reportedly planned in other states.

    Today’s editorial analyses the issues related to Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar. This topic is important for  GS Paper II (Polity and Governance) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Recently, the Election Commission of India (ECI) started a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list in Bihar, just a few months before the 2025 State Assembly elections.

    What is Special Intensive Revision (SIR)?

    Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is a process carried out by the Election Commission of India (ECI) to update and verify the electoral rolls (voter lists) more thoroughly than usual.

    Key Features of SIR:

    • Not a routine update: Unlike regular annual revisions, SIR involves a more detailed and document-heavy verification process.
    • Document verification: Voters are required to submit proof of citizenship (like birth certificates, land documents, or school records), especially if they are not listed in older rolls (e.g., from 2003).
    • Purpose: Officially, it aims to: Remove duplicate or deceased voters, Identify ineligible entries, and Add newly eligible voters.

    Why is the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) seen as a threat to electoral democracy?

    • Sudden and Opaque Implementation: The SIR was launched abruptly in June 2025 with minimal public awareness and a tight deadline of July 31, offering little time for a state with high migration and low documentation. Eg: Migrants working outside Bihar during monsoon may be excluded due to inability to submit documents on time.
    • Document-Heavy Verification Process: Common documents like Aadhaar or voter ID are not accepted. Instead, hard-to-obtain papers like birth certificates, land records, or matriculation certificates are required, placing a disproportionate burden on poor, rural populations.  
    • Creation of a Two-Tier Citizenship: The process presumes voters not on the 2003 rolls are “suspect” citizens until proven otherwise, undermining the principle of universal adult franchise and equal voting rights. Eg: Like in Assam’s NRC, the burden of proof shifts to individuals, potentially creating a permanent class of disenfranchised citizens.
    • Violation of Natural Justice: Requiring voters to prove citizenship reverses the principle of “innocent until proven guilty” and treats individuals as suspect citizens unless they can prove otherwise. Eg: In the Bihar SIR process, those not on the 2003 voter list must submit rarely available documents like birth certificates or land records, making many vulnerable to arbitrary exclusion.

    How does the Bihar SIR compare with Assam’s NRC exercise?

    Aspect Bihar SIR (2025) Assam NRC (2013–2019)
    1. Suddenness vs. Supervised Process Launched suddenly with only one-month deadline, causing logistical challenges. Conducted over six years, supervised by Supreme Court, with phased rollout.
    2. Legal Oversight No direct judicial monitoring; raises concerns about transparency and accountability. Directly monitored by the Supreme Court, ensuring legal safeguards.
    3. Scale and Timeframe Targets 50 million voters in just one monsoon month, with floods and migration. Covered 33 million applicants in multiple phases over years.
    4. Document Requirements Demands rare documents (birth/matriculation/land records); common IDs not accepted. Required legacy documents, but provided assistance centres and lists.
    5. Purpose and Outcome Ostensibly for voter list update, but risks becoming a citizenship test, causing mass disenfranchisement. Explicitly aimed at identifying illegal immigrants; excluded 19 lakh people.

    What constitutional principles are at stake in the current voter verification drive?

    • Universal Adult Franchise: Article 326 guarantees every Indian citizen above 18 the right to vote without discrimination. The demand for rare documents like land titles or educational certificates risks excluding poor and illiterate citizens.
    • Equality Before Law (Article 14): The selective burden of proof imposed on new or undocumented voters violates the principle of equal treatment. It creates two classes of citizens — one presumed to be voters and another forced to prove eligibility.
    • Presumption of Innocence (Principle of Natural Justice): The shift of burden from the state to the citizen undermines the principle that individuals are “innocent until proven guilty.”

    Who are the vulnerable groups most affected by the SIR process?

    • Migrant Workers: The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) disproportionately affects migrant workers who are often away from their home constituencies during the verification period, especially in July, a peak seasonal migration month.
    • Poor and Illiterate Citizens: Those from economically weaker sections, particularly in rural areas, often lack the official documents such as birth certificates, matriculation degrees, or land records now required for voter verification. Their reliance on documents like Aadhaar, ration cards, or job cards, which the ECI currently does not accept, puts them at risk of disenfranchisement.
    • Women (especially Elderly or Homemakers): Many women, especially widows, elderly, or those confined to domestic roles, are not listed on ownership documents and may lack the required identity proofs.
    • Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SCs/STs): Historically marginalised communities such as SCs and STs face greater hurdles due to their geographic isolation, poor access to services, and lower literacy levels, making it harder to furnish the required documentation to prove citizenship or residence.
    • Urban Slum Dwellers and Informal Settlers: Migrants living in slums or unauthorised colonies in cities often lack registered addresses, utility bills, or tenancy documents. This makes it difficult to verify their voter eligibility either in their native village or in the urban location, risking double exclusion from electoral rolls.

    Way forward: 

    • Ensure Inclusive and Transparent Voter Verification Process: Extend the verification timeline, especially in high-migration and flood-prone regions like Bihar. Accept commonly held identity documents such as Aadhaar, voter ID, and ration cards as valid proof. This would reduce arbitrary exclusions and uphold the principle of universal franchise.
    • Protect Vulnerable Groups through Targeted Support: Launch doorstep assistance, mobile camps, and helplines in rural, tribal, and urban slum areas to help citizens gather documents and complete verification. Special provisions should be made for migrants, women, SC/STs, and informal workers, ensuring no one is disenfranchised due to procedural hurdles.

  • Careful curation: On Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls

    Why in the News?

    The Election Commission of India (ECI) is currently carrying out a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list in Bihar. This has caused political and social concerns because the ECI is focusing only on verifying “ordinary residents” and has given a very short deadline ending on July 31 for this process.

    Why is the ECI’s voter roll revision in Bihar being criticised?

    • Short timeframe: The ECI allocated just one month, till July 31, for the entire revision process, which is inadequate for comprehensive voter verification in a state like Bihar.
    • Strict criteria: The emphasis on “ordinary residents” could ignore the legal protection for temporary absentees as outlined in the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
    • Risk of wrongful deletions: Migrant workers might not be present for verification, leading to lakhs of wrongful deletions from electoral rolls.

    What hurdles do migrant voters face in verification?

    • Inaccessibility During Verification Window: Many migrant voters are unable to be physically present at their home constituencies during the short verification period, making it difficult to confirm their status. Eg: An estimated 20% of Bihar’s electorate is migrant; many may miss the July 31 deadline, risking exclusion.
    • Lack of Clarity for Long-Term Migrants: There is ambiguity in addressing voters who have moved long-term but haven’t updated their registration to their new place of work.

    How does the law define ‘ordinary residence’ for voters?

    The Representation of the People Act, 1950 defines ‘ordinary residence’ as the place where a person normally lives and has the intention to return, even if they are temporarily absent.

    Key Legal Provisions:

    • Section 19 of the Act: A person shall be registered in the electoral roll of the constituency of their ordinary residence. Temporary absence does not disqualify a person from being considered ordinarily resident.
    • Electoral Roll Manual Guidelines: Migrants temporarily away (for work, studies, etc.) are still eligible if they have the ability and intention to return. Removal from the roll requires proof of permanent relocation.

    What does Bihar’s gender turnout reveal about migration?

    • Higher Female Voter Turnout: In the 2024 general election, more women voted than men in absolute numbers in Bihar. This indicates a gender skew in voter participation likely linked to male absenteeism due to migration.
    • Male Migrant Absenteeism: Despite having more registered male voters, the male turnout was lower, suggesting many men were away for work and could not vote. It reflects the scale of male labour migration out of Bihar.

    Do the same issues occur in other states?

    • Jharkhand – Migration-linked Voter Drop: Like Bihar, Jharkhand has seen low male voter turnout due to seasonal and long-term migration for labour work.
    • Uttar Pradesh – Exclusion Risk in Urban Centres: In urban areas of Uttar Pradesh, slum and migrant populations often lack proper identity or address documents, making voter verification difficult during intensive revision drives. This causes large-scale exclusions, especially among economically vulnerable groups.

    What are the issues related to NRIs at the all-India level? 

    • Lack of Remote Voting Mechanism: Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) often face difficulty in exercising their voting rights due to the requirement of physical presence at their home constituency in India. Eg: An NRI working in the UAE must travel to India to vote, leading to low voter turnout among overseas citizens.
    • Legal and Procedural Constraints: Though the Representation of the People (Amendment) Act, 2010 allowed NRIs to register, postal or online voting is still not widely available.
      Eg: The Electronically Transmitted Postal Ballot System (ETPBS) has not yet been fully extended to overseas voters, limiting participation.

    What are the case studies in the world? 

    • Mexico – Voting Rights for Migrants Abroad: Mexico allows its citizens living abroad to vote in national elections via postal ballots and electronic voting. This ensures inclusivity for a large number of migrant workers living in the United States and other countries.
    • Philippines – Overseas Absentee Voting Act (2003): The Philippines enacted a law enabling overseas Filipinos to vote in presidential, senatorial, and party-list elections. It recognizes the political rights of migrant workers, encouraging participation despite physical absence.

    How can migrants get better electoral representation? (Way forward)

    • Enable Registration at Place of Work: Long-term migrants should be allowed and encouraged to register as voters at their current place of residence. This ensures their political voice aligns with the region where they live and work, making representation more meaningful.
    • Extend Verification and Enrollment Timelines: The Election Commission should provide a longer and flexible verification window, especially in high-migration states. This prevents wrongful exclusion and ensures migrants’ voting rights are protected even during temporary absence.

    Mains PYQ:

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

    Linkage: The article focuses on the “Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls” conducted by the Election Commission of India (ECI) in Bihar, highlighting criticisms due to the enormity of the task, short duration, and strict verification criteria that could result in the “wrongful exclusion of lakhs of voters”

  • Registered Unrecognized Political Parties

    Why in the News?

    The Election Commission of India (ECI) has initiated the process to delist some Registered Unrecognized Political Parties (RUPPs) that have not contested a single election since 2019 and whose offices are untraceable.

    About Registered Unrecognized Political Parties (RUPPs):

    • Definition: RUPPs are political parties that are registered with the Election Commission of India (ECI) but have not yet qualified as State or National Parties.
    • Electoral Status: These parties may be newly registered, may have contested elections but underperformed, or may have never contested at all.
    • Privileges:
      • Eligibility for election symbols under specific conditions.
      • Tax exemptions for donations under Section 13A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
      • The ability to participate in elections under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.

    How are Political Parties Registered?

    • Legal Basis: Registration is governed by Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
    • Requirements: Parties must submit an application with their constitution or memorandum to the ECI.
    • Declarations: The party must affirm adherence to the Constitution and commit to socialism, secularism, democracy, and national unity.
    • Benefits: Once registered, the party can contest elections, seek a common symbol, and receive legal financial support.

    Criteria for Recognition as a Political Party:

    • For State Party Recognition: A party must:
      • Win 6% of valid votes and 2 Assembly seats, or
      • Win 3% of Assembly seats or at least 3 seats, or
      • Win 1 Lok Sabha seat and 6% of valid votes in a general election from the state.
    • For National Party Recognition: A party must:
      • Be recognized as a State Party in 4 states, or
      • Win 2% of Lok Sabha seats (11 seats) from at least 3 states, or
      • Poll 6% of valid votes in 4 states and win 4 Lok Sabha seats.
    • Advantages of Recognition: Recognized parties get reserved symbols, broadcast time, campaign benefits, and can appoint more star campaigners.
    [UPSC 2001] Consider the following statements regarding the political parties in India:

    1. The Representation of the People Act, 1951 provides for the registration of political parties.

    2. Registration of political parties is carried out by the Election Commission.

    3. A national level political party is one which is recognised in four or more States.

    4. During the 1999 general elections, there were six National and 48 State level parties recognised by the Election Commission.

    Options: (a) I, II and IV (b) I and III (c) II and IV (d) I, II, III and IV*

     

  • Tighten the process: On the Election Commission of India, election processes

    Why in the News?

    After the 2024 Maharashtra Assembly elections, Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, raised serious concerns about the fairness and transparency of how the elections were conducted.

    What are the concerns about voter roll changes in Maharashtra?

    • Abnormal Increase in Voter Numbers: Over 39 lakh new voters were added within just six months after the general election. Eg: The Hindu’s analysis revealed similar spikes before Assembly polls in 2014 as well, suggesting a pattern of inflated rolls.
    • Lack of Transparency and Verification: The Election Commission of India (ECI) has not released machine-readable data to allow public or party-level verification. Eg: Without verifiable voter roll data, political parties cannot check for duplication or manipulation.
    • Insufficient Involvement of Political Parties: The voter roll update process often excludes timely input from political parties, reducing scrutiny and accountability. Eg: Parties raise objections post-election rather than being involved during roll revision, weakening trust in the process.

    Why is restricting CCTV access controversial?

    • Reduces Transparency in the Voting Process: Limiting access to CCTV footage raises suspicion about irregularities or malpractice. Eg: The Centre’s amendment to the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 restricts access, despite demands by political parties like Congress.
    • Hinders Complaint Verification: Without footage, it’s difficult to verify allegations of booth-level misconduct. Eg: Parties cannot validate anomalies in voter turnout after 5 p.m. or respond effectively to irregularities.
    • Undermines Democratic Accountability: Lack of access is viewed as eroding public trust and weakening institutional checks. Eg: Denial of footage suggests the Election Commission is avoiding scrutiny instead of ensuring electoral integrity.

    How did the ECI address late voting allegations?

    • Dismissed Claims of Abnormal Turnout Post 5 PM: The Election Commission of India (ECI) clarified that there was no significant spike in voter turnout after 5 p.m. during the 2024 Maharashtra Assembly elections. Eg: Analysis showed that the voting pattern was consistent with past trends, not unusually high after 5 p.m.
    • Clarified Nature of Provisional Turnout Data: ECI stated that provisional turnout figures, especially those shared via apps, are based on manual inputs and may contain discrepancies. Eg: App-based data can differ from final turnout due to delays and entry errors during polling day.
    • Relied on Final Booth-Level Data (Form 17C): The ECI emphasized that accurate data comes from Form 17C, which is compiled after polling ends and includes machine-verified figures. Eg: Final turnout is based on actual vote counts from EVMs and VVPATs, not manual estimates.

    What was the recommendation of supreme court? 

    The Supreme Court, in a 2023 judgment, recommended that the Chief Justice of India (CJI) be part of the selection committee for appointing Election Commissioners, to ensure independence and neutrality. Eg: The Court proposed a 3-member panel comprising the Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition, and CJI to prevent unilateral government control.

    Way forward: 

    • Ensure Transparent Electoral Roll Management: Involve all political parties in the electoral roll revision process, with machine-readable public data access for verification and accountability.
    • Implement Supreme Court’s Recommendations: Reconstitute the Election Commissioner selection panel to include the Chief Justice of India, ensuring impartiality and strengthening public trust in electoral institutions.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2018] In the light of recent controversy regarding the use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVM), what are the challenges before the Election Commission of India to ensure the trustworthiness of elections in India?

    LInkage: The “trustworthiness of elections in India” and the challenges faced by the Election Commission of India (ECI) in this regard, which is a core concern behind the need to “tighten the process.” The article highlight various issues that challenge election trustworthiness, such as questions raised by the Leader of the Opposition, Rahul Gandhi, concerning “abnormal increase in voters listed in electoral rolls,” “higher turnout numbers after 5 p.m. on voting day,” and the Centre’s amendment to rules restricting “access to CCTV footage of the polling process.

  • A move that endangers the right to vote

    Why in the News?

    The Election Commission of India (ECI) is again trying to link Aadhaar with voter ID, claiming it will help remove fake voters, clean up the voter list, and make elections more fair. However, this move could put people’s right to vote at risk.

    Why is Aadhaar-Voter ID linkage seen as a threat to voting rights?

    • Risk of Mass Disenfranchisement: Linking Aadhaar with voter ID can lead to the wrongful deletion of genuine voters from electoral rolls due to data mismatches or errors in the Aadhaar database. Eg: In 2015, during the National Electoral Roll Purification and Authentication Programme, over 55 lakh voters were arbitrarily removed in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, causing many to discover their names missing only on election day.
    • Violation of the Right to Privacy and Autonomy: The linkage forces citizens to part with their Aadhaar information, effectively making a voluntary scheme coercive. It exposes citizens to data misuse and profiling by political actors. Eg: Form 6B requires Aadhaar submission or a declaration of non-possession, with no real opt-out, pressuring citizens to comply.
    • Disproportionate Impact on Vulnerable Groups: Groups like the elderly, disabled, migrant workers, and rural residents face practical challenges in appearing before Electoral Officers to justify not having Aadhaar, putting their right to vote at risk. Eg: The proposed requirement for in-person appearance imposes an unreasonable burden, especially for people in remote or underserved areas.

    How does the linkage affect vulnerable groups?

    • Imposes Unreasonable Physical Burden: The requirement for in-person appearances before Electoral Registration Officers disproportionately affects individuals who may not be able to travel easily. Eg: Elderly citizens or persons with disabilities may find it extremely difficult to justify their non-submission of Aadhaar physically, leading to potential exclusion from the voter list.
    • Excludes Migrants and Remote Populations: Migrant workers and people living in remote or underdeveloped regions may not have updated documents or easy access to Aadhaar centers, making compliance difficult. Eg: Migrant laborers, often on the move, may not have consistent records, leading to their disenfranchisement due to Aadhaar mismatches or absence.
    • Leads to Arbitrary Deletions from Electoral Rolls: Errors in Aadhaar data or failure to link properly can result in the deletion of legitimate voters, especially those lacking digital literacy or assistance. Eg: During the 2015 Aadhaar-linking exercise, many daily wage workers and marginalized citizens in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana found their names deleted without prior notice.

    Which past events highlight the risks of this linkage?

    • 2015 Deletions under National Electoral Roll Purification and Authentication Programme (NERPAP): The Election Commission attempted Aadhaar-voter ID linkage in 2015, leading to large-scale deletion of genuine voters due to data mismatches. Eg: In Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, over 55 lakh voters were removed from rolls. Many citizens discovered this only on polling day, causing mass disenfranchisement.
    • Supreme Court Stay in August 2015: Following the backlash from the 2015 deletions, the Supreme Court stayed the Aadhaar-voter ID linkage to prevent further voter exclusion. Eg: The Court’s order halted the programme, citing privacy concerns and lack of legal backing, highlighting the constitutional risks involved.
    • CAG Report on Aadhaar Database Flaws (2021): The Comptroller and Auditor General found serious flaws in the Aadhaar system, including duplications and unverifiable residency, raising concerns about its suitability for electoral verification. Eg: The CAG audit revealed that 4.75 lakh Aadhaar numbers were cancelled due to errors and duplication, showing how flawed data could wrongly affect voter rolls.

    Way forward: 

    • Traditional Voter Verification Methods: Instead of relying on Aadhaar, the ECI should strengthen manual verification systems. Eg: Door-to-door verification by Booth Level Officers (BLOs) and in-person checks help maintain accuracy and uphold voter rights without risking exclusions.
    • Independent Audits and Social Oversight: Introducing social audits and independent reviews of electoral rolls can enhance transparency and trust in the system. Eg: Public grievance redressal mechanisms and independent monitoring can prevent politically motivated manipulation and ensure fairness.

    Mains PYQ:

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

    Linakege: “one nation-one election,” it falls under the broader theme of electoral reforms. The article  discusses a specific electoral reform, the Aadhaar-voter ID linkage, and argues that it has negative consequences for the right to vote. Therefore, this PYQ, concerning the need for and nature of electoral reforms, is relevant as the Aadhaar linking initiative can be seen as a debated electoral reform with potential risks to the franchise.

  • Delimitation: Thinking beyond Population Count

    Why in the News?

    The discussion on delimitation and financial distribution has caused worries in Parliament and State Assemblies, as it could affect India’s federal system, especially with the upcoming end of the freeze on parliamentary seats.

    What are the key concerns in delimitation and financial devolution?

    • Impact on Federalism: The redistribution of seats may reduce representation for some states, especially those with better demographic management, affecting their political influence. Example: Southern states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala may lose seats relative to northern states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.
    • Population vs. Representation Imbalance: States with high population growth could gain more seats, while those that controlled their population may be underrepresented. Example: The 2026 delimitation may increase seats in northern states, reducing the share of states like Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.
    • Financial Allocation Disparity: The shift from the 1971 population base to the 2011 census for financial devolution may disadvantage states that effectively controlled population growth. Example: The 15th Finance Commission’s formula increased the weight of population (from 0.15 to 0.27), benefiting larger states like Uttar Pradesh.
    • Challenges of Caste and Gender-Based Reservations: Any redistribution must ensure that marginalized communities continue to receive fair representation despite demographic changes. Example: The Women’s Reservation Bill and SC/ST reserved seats need careful adjustments post-delimitation to maintain proportional representation.

    Why are peninsular States anxious about delimitation?

    • Reduction in Lok Sabha Seats: States like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Karnataka have controlled population growth, whereas states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar have higher birth rates.Example, If seats are redistributed based on 2026 population projections, peninsular states may lose seats while northern states gain more representation.
    • Unfair Distribution of Financial Resources: The 15th Finance Commission shifted to using the 2011 Census for fund allocation, benefiting high-population states. Example: Tamil Nadu and Kerala, despite better governance, receive fewer funds compared to Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, which have weaker social indicators.
    • Penalty for Development Success: Southern states invested in education, healthcare, and family planning, successfully controlling their population. Example: Kerala’s high literacy rate and Tamil Nadu’s low fertility rate may lead to fewer seats, reducing their voice in national decision-making.

    How did the 15th Finance Commission adjust population weightage?

    • Shift from 1971 to 2011 Census Data: The 15th Finance Commission replaced the 1971 Census with the 2011 Census for financial devolution, increasing the weightage of states with larger populations. Example: Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, with high population growth, received a greater share of central funds.
    • Incorporation of Demographic Performance: To balance the impact on states with controlled population growth, the commission introduced a demographic performance criterion. Example: Kerala and Tamil Nadu, which successfully reduced fertility rates, were given some weightage to offset their lower population share.
    • Increased Weightage for Population Component: The weightage for population in financial devolution increased from 15% (in previous commissions) to 27% under the 15th Finance Commission. Example: Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, with high population growth, benefited more from this adjustment.

    What is the role of demographic performance in allocation and representation?

    • Balancing Population Growth with Development: Demographic performance considers not just population size, but how well a state has managed population growth, improving socio-economic indicators like fertility rates and life expectancy.
      • Example: Kerala, which has a low birth rate due to effective family planning policies, might not see a drastic population increase but still deserves fair representation based on its demographic success.
    • Addressing Disparities in Development: States with high population growth but poor demographic performance (e.g., high fertility rates, poor health outcomes) may receive less weight in allocation to balance out the disparity with better-performing states.
      • Example: Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, which have high population growth but relatively poor health and education indicators, may see their representation balanced with the inclusion of demographic performance factors.
    • Promoting Equity in Resource Allocation: Demographic performance allows for a more equitable distribution of resources by considering how well states manage their population and its needs. This ensures that states with better demographic indicators, like lower infant mortality or higher literacy rates, are not unfairly penalized in devolution and allocation.
      • Example: Tamil Nadu, which has effectively reduced its population growth while improving key development metrics, should be rewarded with adequate representation despite its smaller population size compared to more populous states like Madhya Pradesh.

    Which alternatives to absolute population can guide representation? (Way forward)

    • Population Density-Based Representation: Instead of using absolute population, population density (people per square kilometer) can be a guiding factor to ensure fair representation. Example: The Northeastern states (e.g., Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland) have smaller populations but are allocated seats based on geographical and density considerations.
    • Demographic Performance as a Criterion: States that have successfully controlled population growth should not be penalized; demographic performance (such as fertility rates and health indicators) can be factored in. Example: Tamil Nadu and Kerala, which have lower fertility rates, could be granted additional weightage to compensate for their lower population growth.

    Mains PYQ:

    Question: What is the basis of regionalism? Is it that unequal distribu- tion of benefits of development on regional basis eventually promotes regionalism? [UPSC 2016]

    Linkage: Focusing solely on national population figures might mask significant regional disparities that need to be addressed through differentiated policies and resource allocation.

  • Why are electoral reforms necessary?

    Why in the News?

    Recently, the Election Commission (EC) has invited political parties for discussions on enhancing the electoral process.

    What are the key legal provisions governing the electoral process in India? 

    • Article 324 of the Constitution – Grants the Election Commission (EC) the power of superintendence, direction, and control over elections to Parliament, State Legislatures, and the offices of the President and Vice President.
    • Representation of the People Act, 1950 – Governs the preparation of electoral rolls and the allocation of seats in Parliament and State Legislatures.
    • Representation of the People Act, 1951 – Regulates the actual conduct of elections, including provisions on qualifications, disqualifications, election offenses, and corrupt practices.
    • Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 – Provides rules for the registration of voters, corrections in electoral rolls, and the issuance of Electoral Photo Identity Cards (EPIC).
    • Model Code of Conduct (MCC) – A set of guidelines issued by the EC to regulate political parties and candidates, ensuring free and fair elections, even though it lacks statutory backing.

    How has the voting process evolved in India since the first general elections in 1952?

    • Ballot Box System (1952-1957) – In the first two general elections (1952, 1957), separate ballot boxes were used for each candidate, where voters dropped blank ballot papers into the box of their chosen candidate.
    • Printed Ballot Papers (1962 Onwards) – From the third general election (1962), a single ballot paper was introduced with the names and symbols of all candidates, simplifying the voting process. Example: Instead of multiple boxes, voters marked their choice on a single sheet and dropped it in a common ballot box.
    • Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) (2004 Onwards) – Since the 2004 Lok Sabha elections, EVMs replaced paper ballots in all constituencies, improving efficiency and reducing errors.  
    • Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) (2019 Onwards) – From the 2019 general elections, EVMs were backed by 100% VVPAT slips, allowing voters to verify their vote on a printed slip for a few seconds before it was stored in a sealed box. Example: A voter pressing a button on the EVM saw a printed slip confirming their vote for Candidate X before it was automatically stored.
    • Remote Voting and Digital Advancements (Proposed) – The Election Commission is exploring remote voting options for migrant workers and overseas Indians, along with blockchain-based voting mechanisms. Example: The EC has proposed a multi-constituency remote voting machine (RVM) to allow migrant workers to vote from different locations.

    Why are electoral reforms necessary?

    • Addressing Electoral Roll Discrepancies: The ECI aims to improve the accuracy and transparency of electoral rolls, especially amid allegations of tampering in recent elections. For example, opposition parties have raised concerns over duplicate Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC) numbers, demanding discussions in Parliament regarding discrepancies in voters’ lists.
    • Enhancing Gender Representation: The ECI seeks feedback on measures to encourage greater representation of women in political parties and candidate selection processes. This aligns with international practices and aims to make elections more inclusive.
    • Regulating Election Expenditure: Discussions will focus on expenditure ceilings for elections and ensuring timely submission of audited financial reports by political parties. These measures are intended to enhance transparency and accountability in campaign financing.
    • Improving Voting Accessibility: The ECI plans to explore alternative voting methods for domestic migrants, absentee voters, and persons with disabilities. This includes feedback on schemes like the Electronically Transmitted Postal Ballot System (ETPBS) to ensure inclusive participation.
    • Strengthening Legal Frameworks for Campaign Silence Periods: To regulate election campaigns, the ECI will discuss extending restrictions to print media and online canvassing during the 48-hour silence period before polling ends, addressing concerns about social media misuse.

    What is the importance of “One Nation, One Election” in the context of electoral reforms?

    • Enhanced Governance and Policy Continuity – Simultaneous elections reduce the frequent imposition of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), allowing governments to focus on long-term policy implementation without periodic electoral disruptions. Example: If Lok Sabha and State Assembly elections are held together, policymaking won’t be interrupted multiple times due to MCC restrictions.
    • Cost and Resource Efficiency – Conducting elections at different times leads to repeated expenditure on logistics, security, and manpower. A unified election cycle reduces financial and administrative burdens. Example: The 2019 Lok Sabha elections cost around ₹60,000 crore; merging state and local elections could significantly cut costs.
    • Increased Voter Turnout and Engagement – Holding elections simultaneously can improve voter participation by reducing election fatigue and mobilization efforts. Example: Countries like Sweden and South Africa conduct national and regional elections together, leading to streamlined voter engagement and participation.

    Way forward: 

    • Comprehensive Electoral Reforms – Strengthen legal provisions for campaign financing, voting accessibility, and electoral roll management, ensuring transparency, inclusivity, and fair representation in elections.
    • Leveraging Technology for Electoral Integrity – Implement secure digital voting mechanisms like blockchain-based voting and remote voting for migrant workers while enhancing VVPAT verification to boost voter confidence.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q Examine the need for electoral reforms as suggested by various committees with particular reference to “one nation-one election” principle. (UPSC IAS/2024)

    Reason: This question directly asks about the necessity of electoral reforms which highlights several areas needing reform, such as allegations of manipulation of electoral rolls, issues with duplicate EPIC numbers, concerns about EVM and VVPAT processes, misuse of “Star Campaigner” status, exceeding election expenditure limits, and criminalization of politics.

  • [28th February 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: A process where free and fair elections will be a casualty

    PYQ Relevance:

    Q)To enhance the quality of democracy in India the Election Commission of India has proposed electoral reforms in 2016. What are the suggested reforms and how far are they significant to make democracy successful? (UPSC CSE 2017)

     

    Mentor’s Comment: UPSC mains have always focused on the Election Commission of India (2017) and role of the Election Commission of India (2022).

    The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Bill, 2023, is the first law made under Article 324(5) of the Constitution for appointing the CEC and ECs. It was introduced after the Supreme Court’s March 2023 order, which aimed to ensure fair appointments through a high-power committee.

    Today’s editorial discusses about the selection process of Election commissioners which is currently in news. This content would help in GS Paper2 mains.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Bill is flawed because it favors the candidate chosen by the government.

    What are the key provisions of the 2023 Bill for appointing?

    • Selection Committee Composition: A three-member committee chaired by the Prime Minister, with the Leader of Opposition (LoP) in the Lok Sabha and a Cabinet Minister (nominated by the Prime Minister) as members.
    • Search Committee: Headed by the Law Minister, along with two senior bureaucrats, to prepare a list of five eligible candidates for consideration.
    • Appointment Procedure: The President of India appoints the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) based on the recommendations of the selection committee.
    • Seniority Principle: The senior-most Election Commissioner is to be appointed as the Chief Election Commissioner.
    • Binding Nature of Recommendations: It is mandatory for the President to appoint candidates recommended by the selection committee.

    Why has the new law been challenged?

    • Deviation from Supreme Court’s Directive: In March 2023, a five-judge Bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice K.M. Joseph, directed that appointments should be made by a high-powered committee comprising the Prime Minister, LoP, and the Chief Justice of India (CJI). The new law replaces the CJI with a Cabinet Minister, weakening the independence of the selection process.
    • Lack of Transparency: The search committee’s list of eligible candidates is not made public, reducing accountability.
    • Government’s Dominance: The composition ensures a built-in majority for the government’s preferred candidate, undermining free and fair selection.

    What constitutional infirmities have been identified in the selection process?

    • Government-Controlled Majority in the Selection Committee: The selection committee consists of the Prime Minister (Chairperson), a Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition (LoP).
      • This structure inherently creates a 2:1 majority in favor of the government, allowing the Prime Minister and the Cabinet Minister to dominate the decision-making process, undermining an independent and impartial selection.
    • Lack of Independent Oversight: Replacing the Chief Justice of India (CJI) with a Cabinet Minister weakens judicial oversight. This reduces checks and balances, as a Cabinet Minister is subordinate to the Prime Minister and unlikely to challenge the government’s preferences.
    • Violation of Fair and Objective Assessment: The process does not ensure objective evaluation of candidates due to the predetermined government majority. This may violate Article 14 (Right to Equality) as it denies a fair chance to qualified candidates outside the government’s favor and threatens the basic structure doctrine by compromising the independence of the Election Commission.

    What are the key observations of the Supreme Court? 

    • Independence of the Election Commission is Vital: The Supreme Court emphasized that the Election Commission of India (ECI) must be independent and impartial to ensure free and fair elections, which is a fundamental feature of democracy.
      • Example: In the Election Commission of India vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1993), the Court held that the ECI has plenary powers to conduct free and fair elections, reinforcing the need for independent appointments.
    • Need for a Neutral Selection Process: The Court highlighted that appointments to constitutional bodies like the ECI should be made through a neutral and independent process to prevent executive dominance.
      • Example: In March 2023, the Constitution Bench directed that, until a law is enacted, the Prime Minister, LoP, and the CJI should select the CEC and ECs to ensure balanced decision-making.
    • Concerns over Executive Overreach: The Court warned that allowing the executive to control appointments could undermine the institution’s autonomy and jeopardize the integrity of the electoral process.
      • Example: The Court observed that the historical practice of Prime Minister-led appointments was unsatisfactory, as it compromised the Commission’s independence.
    • Violation of Article 14 (Right to Equality): The Court observed that a selection process favoring the government could violate Article 14 by denying an equal opportunity to eligible candidates.
      • Example: The current law creates a government-majority panel, allowing political bias in appointments and limiting fair competition.
    • Upholding the Basic Structure Doctrine: The Court reiterated that free and fair elections are part of the basic structure of the Constitution, which cannot be compromised by biased appointment procedures.
      • Example: In S.R. Bommai vs. Union of India (1994), the Court affirmed that any law threatening the democratic process would violate the basic structure doctrine and could be struck down.

    Way forward: 

    • Restore Judicial Oversight: Reintroduce the Chief Justice of India (CJI) in the selection committee to ensure impartiality and independent oversight.
    • Enhance Transparency: Make the search committee’s candidate list public and adopt objective criteria for fair and unbiased selection.

  • Should convicted persons contest elections?

    Why in the News?

    The Supreme Court is reviewing petitions by Ashwin Upadhyay and others, asking for a lifetime ban on convicted people from contesting elections.

    What does the RPA, 1951 stipulate with respect to electoral candidates convicted of criminal offences? 

    • Section 8(3): Disqualifies a person convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to at least two years of imprisonment. The disqualification extends for six years after their release.
    • Section 8(1): Provides for automatic disqualification for convictions under specific laws (e.g., IPC for heinous crimes like rape, Prevention of Corruption Act, UAPA) regardless of sentence length, plus six years after release.
    • Section 8(4) (Struck Down in 2013): Previously allowed sitting legislators to continue in office despite conviction if they appealed—declared unconstitutional in Lily Thomas (2013).
    • Section 11: Empowers the Election Commission (EC) to remove or reduce the period of disqualification. Used controversially in 2019 to allow Prem Singh Tamang to contest elections.

    What are the various judgments of the SC which favour the decriminalisation of politics? 

    • Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) case (2002): Mandated the disclosure of criminal records by all candidates.
    • CEC vs. Jan Chaukidar case (2013): Upheld that individuals in jail cease to be ‘electors’ and are therefore not qualified to contest elections. However, this was overturned by a parliamentary amendment in 2013, allowing under-trial prisoners to contest elections.
    • Lily Thomas (2013): Struck down Section 8(4) of the RP Act, 1951, thereby disqualifying sitting legislators immediately upon conviction.

    What is the case for a lifetime ban on convicted individuals standing for office?

    • Upholding Integrity & Public Trust: Lawmakers must adhere to the highest ethical standards as they create and enforce laws.
      • Example: The Lily Thomas (2013) judgment disqualified convicted legislators immediately, reinforcing the need for clean governance.
    • Parity with Government Jobs: A convicted person is ineligible for even a junior government job, yet they can contest elections after six years.Example: A person convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act cannot work in government but can become an MP/MLA.
    • Curbing Criminalisation of Politics: 46% of MPs in 2024 have criminal cases, and 31% face serious charges like rape, murder, and kidnapping. Example: Mohammad Shahabuddin, a former MP from Bihar, had multiple murder cases but was elected to office multiple times.
    • Judicial & Expert Recommendations: The Supreme Court, Law Commission (1999, 2014), and Election Commission have all recommended stricter disqualification norms. Example: The Law Commission recommended barring individuals from contesting elections once charges are framed for serious offences.
    • Strengthening Democracy & Rule of Law: A lifetime ban for heinous crimes and corruption would prevent criminals from misusing political power.Example: Lalu Prasad Yadav was convicted in the fodder scam but continued to influence politics despite being disqualified.

    Should convicted persons be allowed to contest elections?

    Arguments in Favour:

    • Rehabilitation & Second Chance: A convict who has served their sentence should not be permanently barred from participating in democracy. Example: Nelson Mandela was convicted and imprisoned for 27 years but later became South Africa’s President, leading the country to democracy.
    • Potential for Political Misuse: Opponents may misuse legal provisions by filing false cases to prevent strong candidates from contesting elections. Example: Political leaders in India, like Arvind Kejriwal, have faced multiple cases, some of which were later dismissed as politically motivated.
    • Disproportionate Punishment: Not all convictions involve moral turpitude or crimes against society. A blanket ban would be excessive in certain cases. Example: A person convicted for protesting against an unjust law (civil disobedience) should not be equated with someone convicted of corruption or murder.

    Arguments Against: 

    • Ensuring Clean Politics: Public representatives should maintain high ethical standards, and allowing convicts to contest elections erodes trust in governance. Example: Mohammad Shahabuddin, a convicted criminal, was elected multiple times despite serious charges, highlighting flaws in the system.
    • Parity with Government Jobs: If convicted individuals are ineligible for government employment, they should also be barred from lawmaking positions. Example: A person convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act cannot hold a bureaucratic post but can become an MP or MLA, which is inconsistent.
    • Threat to Democratic Institutions: Criminally convicted politicians can misuse their power to influence investigations, intimidate witnesses, and weaken democratic institutions. Example: Politicians with serious criminal cases often manipulate legal loopholes and delay proceedings to continue contesting elections.

    Way forward: 

    • Stricter Disqualification Norms: Implement a lifetime ban on candidates convicted of heinous crimes (murder, rape, corruption) while allowing judicial review for politically motivated cases. Strengthen laws to bar individuals from contesting elections once charges are framed for serious offences, as recommended by the Law Commission.
    • Electoral & Judicial Reforms: Fast-track trials of politicians facing criminal cases through special courts, ensuring timely justice. Strengthen the Election Commission’s authority to scrutinize candidates and enforce stricter disclosure norms on criminal records.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q There is a need for simplification of procedure for disqualification of persons found guilty of corrupt practices under the Representation of Peoples Act”. Comment. (UPSC IAS/2020)