New voters have to also submit parents' SIR details for inclusion in electoral rolls
The functionary underlined that the declaration was added through instructions and Form 6 has not been amended
360° Perspective Analysis
Deep-dive into Geography, Polity, Economy, History, Environment & Social dimensions — AI-powered, on-demand
Context
The (ECI) has mandated that new voters applying for inclusion in the electoral rolls via Form 6 must now submit the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) details of their parents. This procedural change, initially rolled out in Bihar and implemented through executive instructions rather than amending Form 6 itself, aims to improve the mapping of electors and reduce the documentation burden on new voters. The ECI has simultaneously defended the SIR process against concerns raised by UN Special Rapporteurs regarding transparency and allegations of minority voter deletion.
UPSC Perspectives
Polity
This development highlights the continuous evolution of electoral administration managed by the (ECI) under of the Constitution, which vests it with the superintendence, direction, and control of elections. The core issue revolves around the integrity of the electoral roll, a fundamental prerequisite for conducting free and fair elections, a basic structure of the Constitution. The provides the legal framework for the preparation and revision of these rolls. The introduction of the requirement to link new voter applications to their parents' Special Intensive Revision (SIR) details is a significant administrative step. For UPSC Prelims, candidates must be clear on the statutory backing for electoral rolls and the ECI's powers to issue instructions (often termed as residuary powers under Article 324) to fill gaps in existing laws or rules to ensure free and fair elections. The fact that this was done via an instruction rather than a formal amendment to Form 6 (which falls under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960) demonstrates the ECI's administrative agility but also raises questions about procedural transparency and statutory backing.
Governance
From a governance perspective, the focus is on the balance between administrative efficiency and the fundamental right to vote (a statutory right under the , though rooted in providing for universal adult suffrage). The ECI argues that linking new voters to their parents' SIR details enhances electoral mapping and reduces the documentary burden on applicants, theoretically improving ease of registration. However, this introduces potential barriers for individuals whose parents are not on the rolls, or who cannot provide these details (e.g., orphans, children of undocumented parents, or migrants). The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) itself is a crucial governance tool designed to purify the rolls by removing duplicate, deceased, or shifted voters. The efficiency of the SIR directly impacts the legitimacy of the electoral process. The controversy surrounding allegations of large-scale deletion of minority voters in areas like Nandigram underscores the governance challenge of ensuring inclusivity while striving for accuracy. The administration must provide robust grievance redressal mechanisms to allow voters to challenge arbitrary exclusions, ensuring the process adheres to the principles of natural justice.
Social
The social implications of electoral roll revisions are profound, particularly concerning the potential disenfranchisement of marginalized communities. The concerns raised by UN Special Rapporteurs bring international attention to the transparency of the SIR process. The allegation that minority voters are disproportionately targeted for deletion touches upon issues of social justice and the protection of minority rights under the Indian Constitution. A stringent requirement to provide parental SIR details could inadvertently act as a filter, disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations who may lack proper documentation or whose families have precarious legal standing or historical disenfranchisement. The ECI's defense rests on the assertion that the process provides 'adequate opportunities to challenge exclusions' and is 'transparent, constitutional and endorsed by the Supreme Court.' In Mains answers, candidates should critically evaluate how administrative procedures designed for efficiency can sometimes conflict with the goal of universal suffrage and the state's responsibility to protect the voting rights of vulnerable social groups.