SC: ‘Election Commission should consider including Aadhaar, ration and voter card’, ‘Supreme’ order on Bihar voter list amendment
The petitions filed against the special revision campaign of the voter list in Bihar were heard in the Supreme Court. After a long debate, the Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to consider including Aadhaar card, ration card and voter card in the documents required for revision. Also, file a reply on three issues. The Supreme Court has issued a notice to the Election Commission and fixed the next date of hearing as July 28.
The Supreme Court has not stayed the special intensive revision of the voter list, because the petitioners have not sought an interim stay. The bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Joymala Bagchi said that we cannot stop a constitutional institution from doing what it should do. The court has given one week’s time to the Election Commission to file its affidavit. At the same time, the petitioners have been asked to file a reply a week after that.
The Supreme Court sought answers on three issues
The Supreme Court has sought answers from the Election Commission on three issues. The Supreme Court told the Election Commission’s lawyer that there is no doubt that the issue before the court is related to the root of democracy and the right to vote. The petitioners are not only challenging the Election Commission’s right to conduct the elections, but also its process and timing. These three issues need to be answered.
Why are you linking the revision to Bihar elections: Supreme Court
Earlier during the hearing, Justice Joymalya Bagchi told the Election Commission’s lawyer that why are you linking this process to the elections to be held in November? This is a process that can be independent of the elections of the whole country. On this, the Election Commission’s lawyer said that the process will be followed. He assured that no one will be excluded from the voter list without giving an opportunity to be heard.
‘Election Commission does not exist without voters’
The Election Commission’s lawyer told the Supreme Court that the Election Commission is a constitutional body which has a direct connection with the voters and if there are no voters, then we do not exist. The Commission does not intend and cannot exclude anyone from the voters’ list, unless the Commission is compelled to do so by the provisions of law. We cannot discriminate on the basis of religion, caste, etc.
Aadhaar card is not proof of citizenship: Election Commission
On excluding Aadhaar card from the list of documents required for voter verification, the Election Commission said that Aadhaar card is not proof of citizenship. On this, the Supreme Court asked the Election Commission that why are you raising the issue of citizenship in the special revision of the voter list? This is the jurisdiction of the Home Ministry. If you had to check citizenship through revision, then you should have done it earlier. It is too late now. The Supreme Court said that the problem is not with the revision process. Rather the problem is with the time chosen for this.
Justice Bagchi said that there is nothing wrong in this intensive process so that non-citizens are not in the voter list, but it should be done before this election. Justice Dhulia said that once the voter list is finalized and notified and after that elections are held, no court will interfere in it.
‘It is too late, you should have done this earlier’
Earlier, Justice Dhulia told the Election Commission’s lawyer that the evidence in the process for citizenship should be strictly evaluated. There should be quasi-judicial authority for this. If you have to check citizenship under the SIR of the voter list in Bihar, then you should have taken action earlier. Now it is too late. The Election Commission told the Supreme Court that citizenship verification is necessary to be a voter in India under Article 326 of the Constitution.
Don’t go to the streets, stay on the highway: Justice Dhulia
Petitioner’s lawyer Gopal S said that the final voter list in Bihar came into existence only in June. After this, Justice Dhulia said that the Election Commission is including judges, journalists and artists in it because they are already known. We should not drag it too long. We should not go to the streets, but should stay on the highway. Justice Bagchi said that your main argument is to keep Aadhaar card out of the category of documents.
Told the petitioner’s lawyer – you tell the Election Commission when should it do this work
The Supreme Court said that the work of voter list revision is in the Commission’s intensive revision and summary revision rules. The Supreme Court told the petitioner’s lawyer that tell us when is the Commission expected to do this? From time to time or when? You are not challenging the powers of the Election Commission, but the way it operates.
‘What the Election Commission is doing is mandatory under the Constitution’
During the hearing, petitioner’s counsel Gopal S said that this is a revision of the voter list. The only relevant provision is the Representation of the People Act 1950. Regular revision of the voter list can be done under the Act and the rules. One is an intensive revision and the other is a summary revision. In intensive revision, the entire voter list is wiped out and the entire process is afresh, which all 7.9 crore voters have to go through. In short, minor amendments are made in the voter list. What has happened here is to order a special intensive revision.
On this, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia said that what the Election Commission is doing is mandatory under the Constitution. You cannot say that they are doing something which is not mandatory under the Constitution. They did this last time in 2003. Because intensive exercise has been done. They have data for it. Why will they rack their brains again? The Election Commission has a logic behind it.
Several petitions filed
Several new petitions, including a joint petition by leaders of opposition parties Congress, NCP (Sharad Pawar), Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray), Samajwadi Party, JMM, CPI and CPI (ML), were filed in the apex court against the Election Commission’s decision to conduct SIR before the elections in Bihar. Apart from separate petitions by RJD MP Manoj Jha and Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, Congress’ KC Venugopal, Sharad Pawar, Supriya Sule from the NCP faction, D Raja from the Communist Party of India, Harinder Singh Malik from the Samajwadi Party, Arvind Sawant from Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray), Sarfaraz Ahmed from Jharkhand Mukti Morcha and Dipankar Bhattacharya of CPI (ML) have jointly approached the Supreme Court.
