The true symbol of democratic governance lies in the election process, through which the people elect their representatives by casting votes. Since Independence, both general and state elections have relied on electoral rolls that are periodically updated. These revisions aim to remove names of deceased voters and those who have permanently migrated, while including new voters who have turned 18 (previously 21) or migrated into the state.
Currently, Bihar is undergoing a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of its electoral rolls, as the state is due for Legislative Assembly elections in November 2025. This process, overseen by the Election Commission of India (ECI), concluded on July 25.
Related articles
There has been significant opposition from political parties (especially those opposing the ruling BJP) and the public regarding how the SIR is being conducted. What is SIR? Why is it controversial? And how does it differ from previous electoral roll revisions?15
Can Electoral Rolls Be Permanent?
No, electoral rolls must be dynamic, reflecting the entire eligible population. However, the major departure in SIR lies in the methodology. Unlike earlier revisions where ECI-appointed personnel enumerated voters, SIR requires individuals to self-enrol, submitting documents themselves. Additionally, this revision occurs shortly before the elections—beginning July 1, just months ahead of the anticipated polls in November. Why the urgency?
A Recipe for Mass Exclusion?
On June 24, the ECI announced the SIR, stating its goal: to include all eligible voters and exclude those ineligible. The 2003 electoral roll is used as the baseline, containing 50 million names. Considering demographic growth, around 30 million more voters are expected to be added.
However, every individual must now fill out a form with personal details, affix a photo, sign, and upload it to the ECI website. While booth-level agents are available to assist, the task is enormous and nearly impossible to complete in just 25 days.
SIR divides voters into two categories—those born before July 1, 1987, and those born on or after. The former must submit their own birth certificates; the latter must also submit their parents’ birth certificates. This imposes an unrealistic burden on millions, especially those without access to such documentation. Even existing voters with valid Voter ID cards risk being excluded due to lack of these specific certificates.
Does SIR Serve Its Intended Purpose?
In past revisions, officials verified voters through inquiries and available documents. In contrast, SIR mandates submission of 11 specific documents, many of which are not commonly held:
l School Leaving Certificate – 15% coverage
l Community Certificate – 16–25%
The protest – agitation of Members of Parliament against the SIR in Bihar (Entrance of the
Parliament House, New Delhi)
l Government-issued ID – 2%
l Passport – 10%
l Birth Certificate – 3%
Strikingly, widely available records like Aadhaar (95%), Ration Card (84%), and documents from rural employment guarantee schemes are not accepted. Most shockingly, even the Voter ID card issued by the ECI is not valid for enrolment under SIR. What is the rationale behind such selective documentation?
Exclusion Over Inclusion?
Is SIR intended to include more eligible voters— or to systematically exclude them? Many who voted in past elections may lose their rights now. Only the names of the deceased or permanently relocated should be removed. But the manner in which SIR is conducted, and the document requirements, disproportionately affect Scheduled Tribes, Scheduled Castes, Most Backward Classes, and minorities. Many in these marginalised communities may not even know their date of birth.
SIR, in its current form, seems ‘destined’ to shape an electoral roll that excludes the very people it should empower. Without a fair list, can any election be truly fair?
No Consultation, No Transparency
Before implementing this drastic change, the ECI did not consult with recognized political parties or civil society groups. No press conference was held to clarify the scope or process of SIR. A mere notification was published in English and Hindi dailies—how many even among the literate would have read or understood it?
The entire exercise has been carried out perfunctorily, lacking transparency or inclusion. SIR, instead of strengthening democracy, has eroded its foundation.
The undermining began earlier with changes in the appointment process for the Chief Election Commissioner. Legislation by the ruling BJP removed the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel, compromising neutrality. The Citizenship Amendment Act, which explicitly excludes Muslim refugees from neighbouring countries, further reveals the ideological agenda of the ruling BJP. SIR appears to be an extension of that same framework.
Parliamentary Silence, Judicial Scrutiny
Despite calls from the Opposition for a parliamentary debate, the government has refused. Protests have erupted outside the Parliament, but the ruling BJP shows no willingness for dialogue. Is this democratic spirit—or autocracy cloaked in electoral process?
Meanwhile, the Social Democratic Forum has filed a writ in the Supreme Court, challenging SIR on the grounds of mass exclusion. The Court has acknowledged these concerns and asked the ECI for clarification.
The protest – agitation of Members of Parliament against the SIR in Bihar (Entrance of the Parliament House, New Delhi)
