Former Election Commissioner Raises Fundamental Questions About Electoral Roll Revision Process
In a significant intervention, former Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa on Tuesday raised serious questions about the fairness and foundational framework of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. Speaking at an event hosted by Saajhi Duniya in Lucknow, Lavasa argued that the Election Commission of India must not shift the constitutional burden of proving citizenship onto individual voters—a responsibility that has historically rested with state machinery.
Legal Framework and Procedural Concerns
During a discussion with Professor Nivedita Menon and Professor Nadeem Hasnain, Lavasa examined the legal underpinnings of the current electoral roll revision. He noted that while the term 'Special Intensive Revision' does not appear in either the Representation of the People Act or the Electoral Registration Rules, the Election Commission does possess authority under Rule 23 to adopt necessary processes for revising electoral rolls.
"The commission's stated intention through its June 24, 2025 notification was clear and uncontroversial," Lavasa stated. "They declared that no eligible voter should be excluded from the electoral roll, and no ineligible person should remain in it. For this purpose, there can be no disagreement."
Constitutional Eligibility Criteria
Lavasa emphasized that voter eligibility is strictly defined by Article 326 of the Constitution, which establishes only four criteria:
- Indian citizenship
- Age 18 or above
- Soundness of mind as determined by a competent medical board
- Absence of disqualification under any law
"Beyond these four requirements, there is no other eligibility criterion," Lavasa asserted, highlighting the constitutional limitations on additional voter qualifications.
Bihar Case Study and Broader Implications
While noting that the SIR process is currently underway in 12 states and union territories—making premature conclusions about outcomes inappropriate—Lavasa pointed to Bihar's completed exercise as illustrative of broader concerns. In Bihar's revision of 7.89 crore names on electoral rolls, 66 lakh entries were removed at the draft stage.
The breakdown of these deletions reveals important patterns:
- Approximately 46 lakh had permanently migrated
- About 21-22 lakh represented deceased individuals
- The remainder consisted of duplicate entries
"None of these deletions relate to eligibility under Article 326," Lavasa emphasized, adding that final numbers regarding ineligibility-based deletions have not yet been published.
Historical Context and Comparative Perspective
Lavasa stressed that India's electoral system has historically operated on a state-driven model, where the responsibility to enroll every eligible citizen rests with the Election Commission and state machinery rather than individual citizens. This represents what he called a 'basic difference' from systems like that of the United States, where individuals must proactively apply for voter registration.
This principle has enabled India to maintain an exceptionally healthy electors-to-population ratio exceeding 99% since the first electoral rolls were meticulously prepared in 1951-52—achieved without reliance on modern documentation systems.
Three-Factor Evaluation Framework
Lavasa proposed that the SIR exercise must be evaluated based on three critical factors:
- The purpose behind the revision
- The principles guiding its implementation
- The procedures adopted during execution
His comments come at a crucial juncture as the Election Commission continues its intensive revision process across multiple states, raising fundamental questions about the balance between electoral integrity and citizen rights in India's democratic framework.
