- 5 weeks ago
Draft electoral rolls across multiple states show substantial voter exclusions, sparking debate over whether the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is a routine cleanup or mass voter exclusion. Former Chief Election Commissioner Dr S.Y. Quraishi and former Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa analyse the sharp drop in registered electors in Delhi and Maharashtra. Ashok Lavasa observes that 'the data which has come out so far does include an extraordinary number of deletions' and questions the rationale behind disenfranchising citizens unable to link their names with 2002 electoral rolls. Dr S.Y. Quraishi questions the foundational premise of discarding past rolls, arguing that if previous rolls were flawed, past elections would stand compromised. Both former commissioners highlight the critical need for transparent procedural safeguards, individual notices, and due process before deleting eligible voters from electoral rolls.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00As the draft electoral rolls come out for different parts of the country, the big question rears its head again.
00:06Is the SIR an exercise in voter exclusion, as critics allege, or is it a much-needed cleanup of electoral
00:14rolls, as its proponents are claiming?
00:17Joining me now, two very distinguished voices, Dr. S.Y. Qureshi, former Chief Election Commissioner, and Ashok Lavasa, former Election
00:25Commissioner.
00:26Mr. Lavasa, let's look at the numbers first. Delhi's draft electoral roll excludes nearly 48 lakh voters out of 1
00:34.45 crores. That's about 30%.
00:36Take a look at Maharashtra, 2.07 crore names excluded out of about 9 crores. That's about 20-25%.
00:44Telingana, 73.39. So in almost every state, about 25-30% voters being excluded.
00:51Is this a much-needed cleanup, or are the numbers troublingly high?
00:57Well, thank you very much for inviting me. But to answer your question straight away, I think the data which
01:04has come out so far does include an extraordinary number of deletions, or exclusions, as you call them.
01:13So clearly, the data put out by the CEOs or by the ECIs so far would indicate that a large
01:24number of people have been excluded.
01:26Now, for example, I was looking at the data of Delhi, which was published in the newspapers today.
01:34And I was quite confused, because almost, as you said, 47 lakh people have been deleted.
01:41Now, there are two categories. One is duplicate and one is dead.
01:45That probably is understandable.
01:47But there is one set of data, which is about 43 lakh something, which accounts for absent-shifted others.
01:58Now, I would be able to make sense of this if this data is segregated and presented.
02:05But even if it is, there are some other questions which come to my mind.
02:12One is that it would be useful to compare this data with similar exercises or the revisions that have been
02:22done in Delhi in the past.
02:24Because is the migration in Delhi, as much as 30% of the total electoral base, appears to be very
02:33high.
02:34So one needs to compare, because those who are absent or shifted, that is why the data needs to be
02:42presented separately.
02:43Because if you're absent, does it automatically mean that you've shifted out of Delhi?
02:49Or it is just that you have not submitted your form?
02:52So it could be a bit of both, Mr. Lawasa.
02:56But the worry is, of course, that, I mean, the government will claim, or the EC will claim, there are
03:00a number of people who migrated.
03:03These are all cities, for example, Mumbai, high number of migrants take place.
03:07So to avoid duplication of votes, they may be, otherwise have voted in their home states of a Bihar, UP.
03:13This time, the government is being more careful.
03:15The EC is being more careful.
03:16In Delhi, also, city of migrants.
03:18It could be that this is reflecting that high amount of a mobile population.
03:24That is why, Rajdeep, I said that unless they put out the data of people who have shifted and compare
03:31it with earlier data of migration, does it compare?
03:35I would feel that this is much on the higher side.
03:40The second question which comes to my mind is that if you look at the projections of population in Delhi,
03:47although there is no census, but there is a system by which Election Commission always makes a projection of the
03:55expected population.
03:57Now, obviously, the population has grown.
04:00It has not come down.
04:01So how is it that the number of electors would come down so drastically?
04:07So that is the second question that occurred to me.
04:11Because as far as inclusion is concerned, the two objectives of eligible people not being excluded and ineligible people not
04:20being included.
04:21So I find that as far as the eligible voters' inclusion is concerned, there is no increase.
04:28Actually, there should have been an increase.
04:31And as far as ineligible voter exclusion is concerned, we have seen it in other cases in SIR also, that
04:38these people who are absent or who have shifted, they are not ineligible as such.
04:44So where are the ineligible people?
04:46That is a question that we need to ask.
04:48Because in all states, if you have people who are absent and shifted and the total aggregate number in the
04:55country has gone down, then there is a big question mark on the census data.
05:01There would also, I'll come back to what you've raised, but Dr. Khureshi, there would also be a big question
05:06mark then on electoral rolls before SIR.
05:09Because if this is the scale of exclusion or deletions, it means that in 2024, for example, when the last
05:17general elections were held, are we saying that the number of voters ineligible were as high as 25, 30 percent?
05:26In some parts of the country, we've even got in Hyderabad, for example, in certain constituencies, the number of deletions
05:34are actually even more than the number of voters in the 2023 elections of Telangana.
05:41So are we saying that previous elections in recent times before SIR, including ones that you supervised, were deeply flawed
05:48because it had number of ineligible voters who are only now being weeded out?
05:53Well, good question. I would ask another question on the same subject.
06:00In 2024, June, elections were held and the present-day government was formed.
06:07Were they based on a faulty electoral roll?
06:11If they were, then the election should be cancelled and let us have a new election.
06:15Now, the rolls which were perfect in June 2024, they were perfect in January 2025.
06:22They became faulty in June 2025. In six months later, they all became so faulty that they had to be
06:29put in the waste paper basket.
06:31And they needed to do reconstruction of the electoral roll from scratch.
06:39So that is the basic flaw in the philosophy.
06:44So the EC could well respond and say, yes, there were anomalies, there were question marks.
06:51And therefore, even political parties were claiming, at least privately, that there were problems with the electoral rolls.
06:57Now they have been corrected.
06:59Very good. Then let us hold 2024 election again.
07:03It was based on a faulty electoral roll.
07:07So faulty, the 33% were non-voters and they voted if it was so defective.
07:13So we can't have a government based on a defective electoral roll.
07:17All right? If they have the guts, let us order a new election.
07:21Possible?
07:23No, you see, I'll give you an example, Mr. Qureshi, for example, which, you know, Rahul Gandhi today put a
07:30question to the election commission, which is correct.
07:32He said Lok Sabha Maharashtra had 9.29 crore voters.
07:37Five months later, when the assembly elections were held, the number went to 9.7 crore voters.
07:45SIR 2026 has brought it down to 7.78 crores.
07:49Which is the real figure?
07:509.29 crores, Lok Sabha 2024, Vidhan Sabha 9.7, that's a rise of 40 lakhs in just four months.
07:57Or now SIR 7.78 crores, which is the real number?
08:02Yeah, that's a very good question and everybody should ask that number.
08:06I want to know, you want to know, what exactly is the number?
08:10Suddenly, when did they disappear?
08:12Now, earlier you were discussing about Delhi.
08:14You know, one-third, 33% of their votes disappeared.
08:18Now, Delhi is not a Bihar or a UP where people are migrating from.
08:23They're not migrating out.
08:24Here, there is a migration in.
08:26If there is some deletion of people migrating, there has to be inclusion of people who have migrated into the
08:34state.
08:34So, that is not reflected.
08:36That is because we don't know the figure.
08:38Nobody knows any figures.
08:39No, they may have dual addresses, Dr. Qureshi.
08:41They may have given an address in UP and in Delhi.
08:45So, they may be double.
08:46You don't want them to vote in two places.
08:49Yeah, certainly.
08:50In fact, they are supposed to give their previous address so that in the new places they can be included.
08:56And, in fact, earlier the onus was on the voter to get it removed.
09:01Otherwise, it was a criminal liability.
09:03In our time, we made it easier that please just tell us a new place where you're going to be
09:10normally resident for more than six months.
09:12Please fill up the form 6 and mention your old address and old card.
09:17We will delete it ourselves so that you don't have to bother.
09:21Is part of the problem, Mr. Lavasa and all of the problems being raised because of the documentation involved, the
09:31very structure of the SIR exercise.
09:34A number of people say, look, we have our Aadhaar card.
09:37We have documents today.
09:39But we can't tell you where we voted in the last election, which is 2002.
09:44You have to provide proof of that, 2002, 2003.
09:47If you cannot, then you have to provide your parents' information.
09:51Is the problem with the structure, which is why many people may not have the documents, even though they are
09:57genuine citizens.
09:58We are seeing that in West Bengal.
10:0091% of those who were excluded went to the tribunals.
10:06That's 9 in every 10 so far have been proven to be legitimate voters.
10:12Rajdeep, I think we need to look at these two things separately because the cases that you're talking about in
10:19West Bengal were the cases of logical discrepancies.
10:23Yes.
10:24Right.
10:25So here what is happening is that out of the 47 lakhs who have been deleted, I think you need
10:32to look at the statistics.
10:34The official statistics and interpret it in a harmonious way.
10:40Are we saying that the population of Delhi is declining?
10:45Because there is a set of data, even if it is a projection, which election commission always keeps in mind
10:52while determining the EP ratio.
10:55As we know, census happens once in a decade, but electoral roll keeps getting revised annually.
11:04And every time an electoral roll is revised, the election commission gives out an EP ratio, which is based on
11:12the projected population.
11:13So I would like to understand from the election commission of India, what is in their view the population of
11:21Delhi now?
11:23Or indeed of Maharashtra, if it is 7.79 crores today and was 9.47 crores just two years ago,
11:33are we saying Maharashtra's population has declined so considerably?
11:37So according to the projections, I think the population of NCT Delhi should be 2.15 CR or something of
11:45that sort.
11:46And if we are working on an EP ratio of 70%, then what are we talking about?
11:52I mean, that is something we need to look at.
11:55The second issue is what you raised about, not being able to map the electors with their 2002 electoral rolls.
12:05That stage will come now in Delhi.
12:08Because from the draft electoral roll, there will be a mapping which will be done by the staff.
12:15And if they are unable to map, then those people will get notices and they will be asked to produce
12:23documents which will establish their linkage with the reference year electoral roll.
12:30So you might actually see further deletions.
12:33Right.
12:33More deletions.
12:34Can I for a moment just get you to respond to what Dr. Qureshi said earlier, Mr. Davasa?
12:39Because he said that if the electoral rolls were so flawed in 2024 when the general elections were held, have
12:48a re-election.
12:48Now you were around at the, I mean, do you believe 2019, for example, are we saying the electoral rolls
12:55were flawed?
12:562024 it was flawed.
12:58Are all the elections that have been held between 2002 and 2026 all flawed elections?
13:06Would you go along with that?
13:07Was there something intrinsically wrong with our electoral rolls when you all were election commissioners?
13:12No, I think what Dr. Qureshi is saying is that, to the best of my understanding, nobody has ever questioned
13:21the completeness or the accuracy of the electoral rolls in such a way that they needed to be rewritten.
13:30So, yes, there are always deficiencies or flaws.
13:34Those flaws do exist and there is a process of correcting those flaws, but not in a way that you
13:42rewrite the entire electoral roll.
13:44So, I think the elections that were held, 2019 or 2024 or even the 2025 election in Delhi or for
13:55that matter, other states, is the EC saying that those electoral rolls were flawed?
14:00I don't think they are also saying that, but this exercise in itself is flawed and it is leading to
14:11mass scale anxiety and because people are being subjected to an unfair procedure.
14:21Which brings me to a question to both of you, starting with you, Dr. Qureshi.
14:26Therefore, given the anxiety that exists, will my name be there, will it not be there on such a scale,
14:32what minimum procedural safeguard should even now be taken by the CEC to guarantee before deleting an eligible elector?
14:40Should I send a personal notice, should I send a personal notice, give a proper hearing within a reasonable time
14:47frame to respond, give a clear reason for my name being not there?
14:52Because it is turning out to be a very cumbersome process, let's say for a senior citizen, for example.
14:58Therefore, I ask you, is there a way in which this process can be made a little simplified in your
15:04view to restore confidence?
15:06You know, there is already existing law that any deletion, and there are Supreme Court judgments on it, that any
15:14deletion, every single deletion, has to be done by, after giving you the notice and the following due process of
15:22law.
15:22Here what is happening, some political activists filed an application that these 200 need to be deleted.
15:30And orders, as we have heard, the orders have gone down, that no questions are there, please delete them.
15:37Now, also we, till our time, our rule was that there will be no bulk applications for deletions.
15:44You can only apply for two, three or four of your neighborhood, not for the whole city.
15:49So, those safeguards were already there, and what has happened to those safeguards, we really don't know, because problem overall
15:58is that nobody seems to know the facts and the figures and the law and whatever is happening.
16:06So, it's the lack of transparency that becomes worrying, Mr. Lawasa, but the same question to you, minimum procedural safeguards,
16:14that I feel confident that eligible citizens will get their cards, that it is not the case, as we've seen
16:22in both Bihar and Bengal,
16:24that suddenly, after the polls, citizens who were eligible, find it out much too late, that they were denied their
16:31right to vote.
16:32So, Rajdeep, there is a procedure, the problem is that it is very cumbersome, and I think it is very
16:41unnecessary to subject people to this kind of procedure.
16:45Now, let me first raise a very fundamental issue, as far as mapping is concerned.
16:52If my name existed in the current electoral roll, not the draft, the valid electoral roll before the draft was
17:00prepared.
17:01If my name exists in that, and if you are not able to map me with the 2002 or 2003
17:10electoral roll, how does it disqualify me?
17:14I don't understand.
17:16If you are 60, 70 years old, 50 years old, why is it necessary for people to be mapped if
17:23I was not an electorate in 2002?
17:26Does it mean that I cannot be an electorate today?
17:29That is a question.
17:30And the other question is, I will give you two examples.
17:34One of a retired IAS officer living in Gurgaon, his name, as it exists in the roll, is Trishan Kumar.
17:45In 2002, it is KK and a surname.
17:49Now, he is being asked to produce evidence that you are the same person.
17:54And then there is another case where the wife of a retired officer, who retired maybe 30 years back, his
18:06wife, who is now a widow, she has lived in that house for 35 years.
18:11She is 87 years old.
18:13She has been asked to come and produce documents in front of the BLO because they can't map her with
18:192002.
18:20I mean, what kind of a system is this?
18:23I think both of you are raising very, very valid concerns, concerns of citizens.
18:28I hope, therefore, there is a way.
18:29Mr. Qureshi, 30 seconds, very quickly.
18:32Yeah, you know, I am talking about the 2002 election.
18:37How are they so sacrosanct, the electoral roll of 2002?
18:40That is final.
18:42That was God's word.
18:44And everything is fine.
18:46And with reference to that, if you are all right, you will continue to be.
18:5130 years, we have been improving the rolls.
18:55Ashok Labas has done it.
18:56I have done it.
18:57Everybody, since 2002.
18:59Why is 2002 so sacrosanct?
19:01What is the guarantee that that was the perfect roll?
19:03That was even more defective?
19:05I get your point.
19:07Both of you have raised very valid points, very valid concerns.
19:11Just one, if you allow me just one, 20 seconds.
19:15You know, the problem is that if you have an irrational system, it leaves a lot of discretion in the
19:23hands of the field functionaries.
19:25Because nobody is clear about the procedure, how transparent it is.
19:30The field functionaries can exercise that discretion in any manner.
19:36Because we are implementing an irrational system.
19:40Can I just leave it there?
19:43I think plenty of food for thought.
19:45I hope that those in the election commission at the moment are listening to these.
19:49These are genuine concerns being reflected by two people who have seen the system up close and personal.
19:56I appreciate Mr. Lavasa and Dr. Qureshi, both of you joining me here on the news today.
20:01Thank you so much.