Who Guards the Vote?
I watched the recent Supreme Court hearings on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls with a mix of concern and clarity. At stake is a simple but sacred democratic fact: the right to vote is a constitutional right, not an administrative convenience. Yet the SIR exercise—aimed at cleansing rolls of ineligible names—has raised an urgent constitutional question: when an electoral body encounters doubt about a person's citizenship, can it effectively suspend that person's franchise pending a central determination?
The tension in plain sight
Two legitimate imperatives collide here:
- The duty to maintain accurate electoral rolls so that elections reflect the genuine will of citizens.
- The duty to protect the franchise and ensure that errors, doubts or administrative haste do not disenfranchise those who have a constitutional right to vote.
Courts, petitioners, and the election management machinery are wrestling with whether an administrative, document-based inquiry—conducted at scale and on compressed timelines—can reasonably translate into removal from rolls before a conclusive, adversarial determination of citizenship by the competent statutory authority.[^1]
Why this matters to me personally
For many years I've advocated for making voting accessible, leveraging technology and sane processes to broaden participation rather than constrict it. Long before this controversy I argued for remote and technology-enabled participation to reduce barriers to voting (see my long-standing idea of a VotesApp).[2]
That does not mean I believe administrative convenience should trump procedural fairness. If anything, the SIR debate made me reflect on the asymmetry: I want more people to vote, but I also insist that any process to exclude must be scrupulous, transparent and just.
Four principles the democracy deserves
When an electoral authority encounters suspicious entries, I think our response should be shaped by four clear principles:
- Presumption in favour of the franchise — existing inclusion on rolls carries a heavy presumptive value. Removing that inclusion must require robust, adversarial procedures, not a summary administrative tick-box.[^1]
- Clear separation of functions — preliminary verification may be permissible to flag doubtful records, but the final determination on citizenship must remain with the statutory authorities empowered by law; referrals must be timely and documented.
- Procedural safeguards and transparency — large-scale exercises that can affect millions must publish methodology, data, reasons for deletions, and accessible remedies for affected individuals.
- Proportional interim measures — if a genuine, narrowly framed interim action is needed, it must be the least intrusive possible (for example, temporary annotation with notice and immediate right to appeal), not wholesale removal that silences a voter in the very election their voice matters most.
Practical fixes I'd propose
- Publicly publish the SIR methodology, deletion/restoration statistics, and anonymized evidence used for large deletions before final rolls are published.
- If a citizenship query is referred to the Centre or a tribunal, do not automatically delete the name. Instead, flag the entry with a clear procedural timeline and an expedited appeal route.
- Ensure that common identity documents (ration card, voter ID, Aadhaar for identification—not as sole proof of citizenship) are accepted for provisional retention unless a full adjudicatory process demonstrates disqualification.
- Create easily accessible legal aid for marginalized voters who risk losing their franchise due to documentation gaps.
These are practical measures that align administrative diligence with constitutional fairness.
Continuity in my thinking
I've argued for technology to expand access to voting, not to restrict it. My earlier work on ideas like a VotesApp was about enfranchising more people, not about subjecting existing voters to fragile administrative proofs. Those same instincts lead me to insist: processes that subtract from our democratic base must meet the highest standards of fairness and evidence.[2]
Final thought
Cleaning electoral rolls is legitimate and necessary. But when the means risk silencing citizens, we must pause. Democracy is not merely about accuracy of lists; it is about protecting the dignity of the citizen and the sanctity of the vote. Any procedure—however well-intended—that removes that dignity without full procedural safeguards does more harm than good.
Regards,
Hemen Parekh
Any questions / doubts / clarifications regarding this blog? Just ask (by typing or talking) my Virtual Avatar on the website embedded below. Then "Share" that to your friend on WhatsApp.
[^1]: Coverage and reporting summarizing the issues and hearing points are helpful background: LiveLaw coverage of the SIR petitions.
[2]: For context on my long-standing view on widening access to voting through technology, see my earlier piece on "VotesApp": http://www.hemenparekh.in/2013/08/votesapp.html
Get correct answer to any question asked by Shri Amitabh Bachchan on Kaun Banega Crorepati, faster than any contestant
Hello Candidates :
- For UPSC – IAS – IPS – IFS etc., exams, you must prepare to answer, essay type questions which test your General Knowledge / Sensitivity of current events
- If you have read this blog carefully , you should be able to answer the following question:
- Need help ? No problem . Following are two AI AGENTS where we have PRE-LOADED this question in their respective Question Boxes . All that you have to do is just click SUBMIT
- www.HemenParekh.ai { a SLM , powered by my own Digital Content of more than 50,000 + documents, written by me over past 60 years of my professional career }
- www.IndiaAGI.ai { a consortium of 3 LLMs which debate and deliver a CONSENSUS answer – and each gives its own answer as well ! }
- It is up to you to decide which answer is more comprehensive / nuanced ( For sheer amazement, click both SUBMIT buttons quickly, one after another ) Then share any answer with yourself / your friends ( using WhatsApp / Email ). Nothing stops you from submitting ( just copy / paste from your resource ), all those questions from last year’s UPSC exam paper as well !
- May be there are other online resources which too provide you answers to UPSC “ General Knowledge “ questions but only I provide you in 26 languages !
No comments:
Post a Comment