SIR May Be Legal but Is Not Fair: Former Election Commissioner

Context

• • Former Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa has raised concerns over the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. He argued that an electoral process can be legally valid yet substantively unfair if it imposes disproportionate burdens on citizens. The debate highlights the need to balance electoral integrity with accessibility, inclusion and public trust.

What is the Core Concern?

• • Lavasa criticised the approach of “might is right”, where institutions focus on what they can legally do rather than whether it is fair and consistent with the spirit of democracy.
  • He questioned the deletion of 13 crore names from electoral rolls and whether adequate efforts are being made to prevent genuine voters from being excluded.
  • According to him, excessive procedural burdens can create mass anxiety and disenchantment with the democratic process.

Legality ≠ Fairness

Why is Electoral Roll Revision Important?

A. Electoral Integrity

• • Accurate electoral rolls are essential to prevent:
    • Bogus voting
    • Duplicate entries
    • Ineligible voters
  • Electoral-roll revision therefore strengthens the credibility of elections.

B. Risk of Exclusion

• • At the same time, complicated documentation or verification requirements may disproportionately affect:
    • Poor citizens
    • Migrants
    • Marginalised communities
    • People lacking documentation
  • Hence, the process must ensure “no eligible voter is left behind.”

Constitutional & Democratic Perspective

The issue involves a balance between:

Electoral Purity ↔ Universal Participation

• • Elections are not merely an administrative exercise; they are the foundation of representative democracy.
  • Article 326 provides for elections to the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies on the basis of adult suffrage.
  • Therefore, electoral reforms should improve accuracy without creating unnecessary barriers to participation.

‘Power Dynamics’

• • Lavasa also highlighted changing power dynamics between institutions and political actors.
  • He questioned whether political parties are adequately addressing issues affecting public life and ordinary citizens.
  • This raises the broader governance concern of institutional accountability.

Way Forward

• • Ensure transparent and evidence-based electoral-roll revision.
  • Provide adequate opportunity for claims, objections and appeals.
  • Use technology without excluding citizens lacking digital access.
  • Ensure independent monitoring and clear communication.
  • Maintain the principle of proportionality while removing ineligible names.

Conclusion

Electoral reform must pursue both accuracy and inclusion. A credible election system is one where electoral rolls are clean without making genuine voters feel disenfranchised.

“Democratic legitimacy requires not only legality of procedure, but fairness in its implementation.”