Measurement of success is complicated; Assessing the impact of someone’s action can be even more demanding. The desire to be successful differs from despair to prove success.
The parties have different standards for measuring performance depending on their interest leaving the fundamental question “How can you measure your own success?” The Indian Election Commission (ECI) might be in a trilem as a result of the announcement of its special intensive revision (Sir) of electoral roles in Bihar, captured between political parties, citizens, judiciary and his own conscience.
He finds himself again in the imbroglio that can be avoided and responds to the questions of the judiciary that arose from the legitimate anxiety of millions of voters, valid concerns of neutral observers and unverified suspicion of political interest groups.
ECI embarked on a seemingly commendable and perfectly legal exercise to cleanse the electoral roles, and declared her determination to include all “eligible” and exclude “ineligible” persons. The basic prerequisite was that some “ineligible” people infiltrated electoral roles and during their proper process of documentary and physical control escaped the detection carried out by officials of election registrations before putting someone into election roles. Even compulsory periodic revisions could not filter them over the years. No one could protest against this effort, but the terrible task. Nevertheless, ECI was facing the head of the opposition of political parties and civil society organizations for performing this mammoth exercise and imposing impossible demand for helpless citizens in Bihar as they prepare to perform their strongest rights – the election of their representatives. It is a similar request for a marriage certificate after years of happy marital life with children as evidence of a legal union.
Reputation
Certainly, if there is one organization in the country that is able to perform gigantic exercises, it would undoubtedly be ECI. Since the preparation of the first election roles in the 1920s in the testing circumstances to the update of the roles required by the reorganization of the states in 1956, when it was proposed to be extended to allow the time to revise the role. ECI did not want a constitutional change because of its inability to meet the mandatory requirement and fulfill the challenge. Since then, he has repeatedly demonstrated his abilities in solving mega tasks with stunning success.
Whether it is a billion people or set up a million polling stations, it mobilizes over 18 election election officials to make elections and their training, or deal with the movement of 30 lakh electronic voting machines, ECI did it with an aplomb, supported by a government machine. In this process, the whole country and envy of democracy have gained gratitude. Countries that may have spirit but not systems often looked at the ECI as a model in creating standard surgical procedures, in galvanizing sources and its effective consulting approach in building consensus between political parties.
This has gained ECI voters’ confidence and provided it with credibility, which was recognized by the media, supported by civil society organizations and has received respect for the judiciary. Some really referred it to it as “gold standard” who thought cynics who believe that “everything that glitters is not gold.”
Bihar exercise
It was in this background that the sudden announcement of the ECI was cleaned by the electoral roles of Bihar, which called on unpleasant reactions. As opponents challenge the motifs of ECI to increase the ghost of bulk exclusion, ECI seeks to prove the ease with which this apparently irregular operation involves almost eight registered voters of the registered crore in Bihar.
Meanwhile, he released some strict procedures, allowing those who applied after 2003, using their parents’ records in the 2003 election roles to support their citizenship. It also allowed officers at the stand level (BLO) to receive enumeration forms without a prescribed document to demonstrate voters’ capacity after 2003. Relaxation apparently increased the daily list of enumeration forms. It would probably be released by the screams of the complainants and perhaps convinced the higher judiciary that political sound and fury mean nothing.
However, it remains unclear how Blos “recommends” for inclusion in the proposal of a role whose forms are not accompanied by documents and how electoral registration clerk/assistant of election registration decides on their capacity in the absence of these documents. Does ECI ask such voters to provide evidence of their competence/citizenship after the proposal has been published on August 1? If it agrees to expand the list of prescribed documents, as proposed by the Indian court of the Supreme Court (consider the Aadhaar card, electoral identification card or EPIC and allocation card), does it simply mean verification of identity and not citizenship? Are we not back to square?
Will it be an indicator of success by the number of “properly completed” forms submitted together with “separate documents” and voters who are read into roles to be cleaned? Or will his success be the number of “ineligible” voters discarded? Those who are dead who migrated or enrolled twice should be discarded in a normal course. Did their exclusion guarantee this extraordinary exercise?
About the presumption of citizenship
Assessing the assumption of citizenship to voters in the 2003 list is ECI that after his current Sir, all those who adopted the government in the election war as citizens, as in the Citizenship Act, and no login data will be questioned later? Is the government willing to accept this assumption?
No individual is responsible for birth where it is, or for the creation of documentary evidence of the date and place of birth, parenting or citizenship. The office authorized by law is. Like many countries, India has a law that is not referred to as a competent authority: at least not yet. However, the wide shoulders are, however, may not be strong enough to carry someone else’s burden.
We’ll see who the bell in Bihar.
Ashok Lavasa is a former election commissioner and Minister of Finance Union of India
Published – 18 July 2025 12:16
