The Election Commission’s decision to extend the deadline for the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in nine states and three Union Territories is a tacit admission that the exercise has been less than ideal. For weeks, opposition parties have argued that the schedule was impossibly crammed. The one-week extension concedes that the objection had merit. The question now is whether an extra week is enough to complete what is nothing short of a gargantuan national task. The numbers alone are staggering. Revising and verifying over 500 million entries on electoral rolls cannot be done in a hurry without compromising accuracy. The Commission insists that the SIR has been proceeding uninterruptedly and that the revised dates will be met. It has even cited the example of Bihar. That claim may carry a grain of truth, but it glosses over a critical reality: the outcomes in Bihar were too modest to justify the frenetic pace of the revision or the enormous effort expended by ground-level staff.
One stated objective of the SIR is to weed out foreign nationals who have allegedly infiltrated the voter lists. Yet, the results so far raise more questions than confidence. The number of foreigners identified is minuscule, and most of them were Nepali citizens, not Bangladeshis, as unsubstantiated allegations often suggest. Even if one allows for a degree of political exaggeration from opposition parties, the fact remains that the process has been marred by errors, inconsistencies, and complaints that genuine voters have been removed while dubious entries, including those carrying photographs of globally famous personalities, have mysteriously slipped through. Given the sheer scale of the operation, the Commission had sufficient precedents to guide it. The last such revision, conducted in 2003–04, was exhaustive and methodical. Yet, instead of learning from that model, the present revision appears driven by an inexplicable urgency. What was needed was an intensive revision; what we got was a hurried one.
More troubling are the human costs buried beneath official claims. Reports have surfaced of grassroots officials, overwhelmed by impossible deadlines and backbreaking workloads, succumbing to despair. While suicide can never be justified, neither can the pressure that pushes individuals to such breaking points. Targets and timelines set in conference rooms cannot be achieved by overworked and underpaid enumerators without institutional support, adequate manpower and humane working conditions. The Election Commission’s credibility rests not only on the conduct of polling but also on the integrity of the voters’ list. In rushing through a process where precision is paramount, it risks eroding the very trust it is mandated to uphold. A comprehensive, transparent revision would have strengthened democracy. A hasty one only weakens it. The EC must remember that in matters as vital as the voter roll, speed is no substitute for integrity.
