Bihar SIR: Public hearing exposes citizens’ hardships; panel criticises EC

The Election Commission’s (EC) decision to conduct a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list in Bihar just before the assembly elections is under intense scrutiny.

In a public hearing on this held in Patna on Monday (July 21), people from various places in Bihar shared their experiences regarding the difficulties they faced during this entire process and demanded its cancellation.

The hearing was held by a panel including former Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah, former judge of the Patna High Court Justice Anjana Prakash, economist Jean Dreze, and Professor Nandini Sundar, among others.

The story of Phool Kumari Devi of Katihar, Bihar, shared at the hearing, was heartrending. During the SIR process, the BLO asked Phool Kumari for a photo, and photocopies of her Aadhaar and voter ID cards.

According to Phool Kumari, she did not have money to get her photo taken, so she sold rice from her ration allotment to gather the funds needed for the photo. In this process, Phool Kumari, who works to support her family, was unable to go to work for two days, resulting in a loss of wages.

An agitated Phool Kumari questioned, “What kind of system forces its own citizens to go hungry?”

Other people at the hearing reported that enumeration forms were distributed not by the BLO but often by the ward councillors, Anganwadi workers, or sanitation workers. Many voters were not informed how to fill in the forms.

In several families, not all members received the forms either. Many married women faced difficulties in bringing documents from their parental homes.

The BLO also allegedly accepted identification documents like Aadhaar and voter cards, which are not included in the EC’s official list, though the Supreme Court has suggested so. A few individuals received receipts for the forms, but only after photocopying the latter.

Many at the public hearing were unaware that their forms had already been submitted by the BLO without their signatures. In many places, illiterate voters had to pay nearly Rs 100 to fill in a single form.

Some BLOs allegedly took copies of bank passbooks, which is not included in the EC’s standard procedure. In flood-affected villages along the Kosi River, documents are repeatedly washed away, especially affecting the poor and Dalit communities.

There is immense pressure on the BLOs too. Those adhering to the rules are being reprimanded for being slow, and threated that their salaries would be withheld. Some individuals reported that the excessive workload of BLOs and Anganwadi workers in this process is harming educational and nutritional welfare schemes.

After the public hearing, retired judge Anjana Prakash spoke to The Federal, stating that this initiative by the EC is unconstitutional. She said the right to vote is the most fundamental right of the people, and this entire process attempts to deprive them of it.

Economist Jean Dreze also stated to The Federal that the SIR should be cancelled.

Former Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah mentioned, “There is an abuse of administration; it is not helping the people but harassing them. The SIR process is neither in accordance with the Constitution nor with the RTI Act.”

Sociologist Professor Nandini Sundar described the SIR as dangerous for the public.

Political activist Yogendra Yadav, associated with Swaraj India and the Bharat Jodo campaign, told The Federal that fraud is being committed in the name of revising the voter list in Bihar.

He expressed surprise at the EC’s claim that 95 per cent of voters were given forms and received back, despite the BLO not having visited them.

He described the EC’s orders as “tyrannical”. Yogendra Yadav stated there is immense pressure on the EC and that there is no need to implement this SIR in Bihar.

Yogendra Yadav remarked that the EC will claim that the SIR process has been successfully completed in Bihar. However, the Supreme Court will need to examine its success claims, and if it endorses this, it will be a matter of concern.

A hearing on this matter is scheduled in Supreme Court on July 28.