The Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) will be the focus of all attention as the State goes into Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral roll. The exercise is scheduled to start on November 4, and the voter verification work, particularly for those whose names were not in the 2002 SIR list, will be closely watched, especially in view of charges of ‘vote chori’ and poll machinery biases playing in the background. Nonetheless, this process is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the State’s electoral rolls, which have witnessed a significant increase—from 9.27 lakh voters in 2002 to 11.85 lakh earlier this year—reflecting demographic changes, natural growth, and possibly some anomalies.
A primary concern in a SIR is the fear of voter disenfranchisement. There were apprehensions in Bihar recently that genuine voters, especially from marginalized communities, rural areas, or migrant populations, could be left out due to a lack of proper documentation. There were fears that arbitrary or hurried deletions based on incomplete data could disenfranchise voters. Parties were of the opinion that the BJP can manipulate the exercise to target specific communities or political groups, thereby skewing electoral outcomes. In a State like Bihar, where community loyalties are deeply intertwined with political dynamics, the genuineness of SIR was always going to be questionable, which is why this exercise needs collective participation.
CEO Sanjay Goel’s chairing of an all-party meeting reflects the significance of a team effort approach. Political parties, being the voices of various sections, must commit themselves to being the watchdogs of the voters’ rights. The joint position to halt the deletion of real names, prevent the creation of false entries, and detect any wrongdoing by Booth Level Officers (BLOs) is a positive indication of working towards electoral integrity.
The electoral machinery, however, has a monumental task at hand to match and record voters with the 2002 list. Registered voters in 2002 will only have to provide an enumeration form and a copy of their previous voter list, and that’s easy. The challenging part is where names that are not on the 2002 list, where further identified, and heritage documents, such as extracts of the voter list of their parents, are required.
Although the exercise looks well thought out, there are stumbling blocks. The problem of dead voters-roughly from 60,000 to 70,000, would be nightmarish, especially in cases where there are no death certificates. MLOs are expected to dispatch letters to such people to show their existence. This puts the spotlight on documentation, which is also the point of view of the opposition parties. The Congress has accused the ruling party of facilitating fake voters, while GFP has warned that targeting certain communities for deletions might lead to the loss of electoral fairness.
Among the most disadvantaged communities, Vanarmare, Mundkars, and tenants who may have protective documents that confirm their legitimacy are particularly vulnerable to the issue of inclusion. The question of how their voices can be heard without being silenced requires a balanced resolution that respects the community’s truth and, at the same time, maintains electoral integrity. The task should disregard deleting or excluding based on partial records as these may be accusations of bias or manipulation.
At any rate, the SIR calls for transparency, neutrality, and engagement from all stakeholders. If everything goes as planned, it will be a win-win situation for both the electoral system of Goa as well as for the voters’ trust. The CEO, political parties, and the electorate collectively should make sure that the revision is a reflection of actual voter eligibility, sustaining the democratic fabric, and increasing trust in electoral processes. Let the democratic spirit prevail.
