Whether Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Karnataka will trigger “logical discrepancies” will be known only after the draft electoral rolls are published, Karnataka Chief Electoral Officer V. Anbu Kumar said, in an interview with The Hindu, dismissing fears of arbitrary deletions and asserting that the exercise is aimed at identifying and including all eligible voters.
What exactly are you referring to when you say SIR will be carried out as per protocol? Is there a written protocol?
By protocol, I mean the guidelines given by the Election Commission of India. These guidelines state how the SIR will begin, what the provisions are, and what the Representation of the People Act, 1950, says that permits the Election Commission to undertake this exercise. So yes, there is a step-by-step procedure for every aspect.
We saw in West Bengal that “logical discrepancies” came up as a category later during the exercise. Should people in Karnataka be prepared for any such additional categories as the process moves forward?
I can say this only after the draft roll is published. It depends on the data people provide during the enumeration phase. Whoever submits the enumeration form back will have their names included in the draft rolls. If there is any difference between the information submitted in the enumeration form and the data available in the electoral roll of 2002, that is a discrepancy. I cannot comment on this as a category, as I do not have the data as of now. Only after the draft roll is published will we know whether logical discrepancies will be taken up.
We have seen different versions of SIR across states. West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, and Bihar, have all seen different versions. What exactly are Karnataka voters looking at here?
The only difference is in Annexure 3 of the enumeration form. In Bihar, only the elector can sign the form, whereas in other states including Karnataka, any adult family member is also permitted to sign. This is the key change. Beyond this, there is no other change.
If a person’s name is deleted in Karnataka under SIR, what does that actually mean for them? Is it only about not being able to vote, or can it affect their access to government schemes and other rights?
First, deletion will happen only if the enumeration form is not submitted. A person, an eligible voter, cannot be deleted just like that. Even if someone does not remember where they were enrolled in 2002, the BLO and BLA will help trace it. We cannot comment on government schemes. Unless the enumeration form is not submitted, or there are claims regarding eligibility, such as citizenship issues or duplication of names, deletion will not happen. If someone misses submitting the form, they can still file Form 6 along with Declaration D.
Unless the enumeration form is not submitted, or there are claims regarding eligibility, such as citizenship issues or duplication of names, deletion will not happen, Karnataka CEO V. Anbu Kumar says.
| Photo Credit:
BHAGYA PRAKASH K
Migrant labourers, transgender persons, daily-wage workers move across States for work and many have had their identity records changed over the years. Are they automatically at a greater risk of deletion because they cannot show continuity in documents?
No. Enumeration forms will be served using the 2025 electoral roll; the 2002 roll is only being referred to as the last SIR data. Forms will only be delivered to the addresses listed in the current roll. If a house is locked, the BLO has been instructed to visit three times and leave the form there. In case of name changes or other subsequent updates, supporting documents can be submitted when a notice is served, if at all served.
Your booklet says that if an ERO or AERO doubts a person’s eligibility due to non-submission of documents “or otherwise”, they can initiate a suo motu inquiry and refer suspected foreign national cases to the competent authority. What does “or otherwise” mean, who is this competent authority, and will such cases go before any tribunal?
If the ERO is not satisfied with any data, a notice can be issued. “Otherwise” means complaints or any other doubts regarding eligibility. In such cases, the ERO can initiate an enquiry to verify facts based on the notified documents. Any notice issued will clearly mention the reason.
Regarding competent authority, appeals against an ERO’s order lie first with the District Magistrate, which here is the Deputy Commissioner, and then with the Chief Electoral Officer of Karnataka. These are the two appellate authorities provided under the Act. There will be no tribunal.
Have there been any lessons learnt from the SIR process in other States and inclusive corrections made for the Phase III?
I am not authorised to comment on other States. But just for reference, SIR has been conducted in neighbouring states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala, and we will take note of the experience from other States as well. The procedure, however, is the same for everybody, and we have to follow that procedure. We are here to listen to suggestions. But my request is not to have greater concerns beyond what is clearly laid down in law, because our procedure is very clearly set.
How exactly are you ensuring participation from political parties and civil society groups in this process?
We would like to connect with people only through the BLOs and recognised political parties. I cannot involve or assign any civil society group with the responsibility of enumeration or related duties. Their participation can only be through public awareness initiatives and campaigns, where everyone is free to participate. The BLOs are well trained for this process.
Whether Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Karnataka will trigger “logical discrepancies” will be known only after the draft electoral rolls are published, Karnataka Chief Electoral Officer V. Anbu Kumar said, in an interview with The Hindu, dismissing fears of arbitrary deletions and asserting that the exercise is aimed at identifying and including all eligible voters.
| Video Credit:
The Hindu
