Dr. Muzaffar Hussain Ghazali The Bihar Assembly election is a crucial turning point in the electoral history of our country. This election took place in the backdrop of the voter list released on June 25 based on Special Intensive Revision (SIR), in which the NDA achieved a historic victory. Ignoring all the flaws of SIR, new rules were formulated in Bihar for adult suffrage. In the discussions in the Constituent Assembly, the concept of a democratic system was presented which would be "of the people, for the people, and by the people". Electoral democracy was its foundation. It was based on the legacy of the freedom struggle that made the citizen its basis. Every citizen of India was given the right to one vote, regardless of their caste, religion, language, culture, or race. To maintain this system, the Election Commission of India was given the status of a strong and independent constitutional body. It was expected that it would help citizens decide their political future through two basic principles. First, the voter list would be prepared by the Election Commission itself and would not be left to the mercy of political parties or governments. Therefore, the final publication of the voter list was the responsibility of the Election Commission, and this burden was not placed on any individual citizen. Second, the citizens of India would be included in the voter list, but the Commission was kept separate from the task of determining citizenship. If there was any dispute, it would be resolved in consultation with the Ministry of Home Affairs.
For the first time in Bihar, SIR deviated from both basic principles. According to SIR, voters had to fill out a form to verify their names in the voter list, and even if there was no dispute, they had to show the documents specified by the Election Commission to prove their eligibility to vote. In this way, the second principle also began to break down because the documents specified by the Election Commission were similar to the requirements of the National Register of Citizenship (NRC), as conceived in the spirit of the Citizenship Amendment Act. This reignited the controversy that had already sparked and was stalled due to difficult questions. There was strong opposition in Bihar, and a debate erupted across the country. The real problem was that there was no single authentic document to prove citizenship. The proposed SIR was done in the name of filtering out foreign, fake, and duplicate votes. While the SIR process indicates the selection of voters according to the BJP's preference. If the matter was to delete foreign, fake, or duplicate votes, no one would have objected, but to declare the votes of living people as dead and cut them off. Migrant laborers, whose numbers are very high in Bihar, failed to register their names due to limited time. The rate of deletion of names of women, Dalit, and weaker section voters also increased significantly. In border districts, a large number of voters from minority religions were deleted. Clearly, this process severely traumatized a large section of voters and created suspicion in society.
The Election Commission could not tell how many foreign voters were found in SIR. It is also refusing to say that there is a relationship between citizenship and the voter list. But it is clear from its focus that this is not a process of correcting errors in the voter list, but a large-scale tactic of exclusion and disenfranchisement. Both the draft and final lists exacerbated the controversy and showed a significant decrease in the number of voters. The questions and concerns raised about SIR, along with the attitude of the Election Commission, have increased. Its performance has made it clear that it is not only incompetent and lacking in transparency but also has a clear bias towards the ruling party, which the opposition has called vote theft. Despite strong opposition, the BJP government has started a vote-banding campaign in 12 states without preparation and formal training of BLOs, like note-banding. So much pressure was created to complete this task that 30 officers, including BLOs, lost their lives. But the government and the Election Commission did not care.
SIR is also being carried out in heavily populated states like Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh. Why is there such haste when there are no elections in these states next year? More time could have been given here. But why is SIR not being done in Assam, where elections are to be held next year? In Bengal, the BJP itself is questioning SIR. While the Election Commission is working according to the wishes of the central government. The opposition agrees on this matter; they wanted to bring a proposal to impeach the Election Commissioner in Parliament. The government accepted the opposition's demand to discuss the matter in Parliament to save Gyanesh Kumar. Now, on December 8-9, there will be a discussion in Parliament on election reforms instead of SIR. It is believed that SIR will also be discussed in the context of election reforms. Anyway, due to the opposition's strong reaction to SIR, the time for SIR has been extended by one week. Here, it is also necessary to consider that several petitions against SIR are pending in the Supreme Court. It has given advice to the Election Commission but has not made any decision. While it is the guardian of the Constitution and has the right to review the policies of the Election Commission.
The BJP wants to create fear and uncertainty among the weaker sections through SIR and take advantage of the herds. At the same time, it is working on a plan to win elections by bringing the votes of small parties to its side. SIR has proven to be a very effective weapon in this. In such a situation, the opposition, especially the parties associated with the India Block, should think about ways to deal with it. Along with this, they will have to audit their alliance to see how satisfied the allied parties are with each other. The workers of the ruling party are engaged with the BLOs to achieve their goal, and the opposition is just raising a hue and cry. It should engage its workers in this process so that no citizen's vote is cut off. Although there are many real issues that have affected the lives and livelihoods of the common people, the opposition has failed to shape public opinion effectively. It should clarify its agenda so that the ruling alliance can be strongly challenged. The future of the opposition lies in restarting strong movements on public issues and waging a continuous political struggle against government manipulations and overall Hindu nationalist corporate attacks. The struggle for a neutral electoral system and fair democracy requires such consistent efforts. The ruling party, BJP, has made its intention and plan clear through SIR. Now it's the opposition's turn to tell the public how they can improve their lives.
