Newspatrolling.com News cum Content Syndication Portal Online
The Election Commission of India’s (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls has triggered a fresh political confrontation in Tamil Nadu, with the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) being accused of adopting conflicting positions on the exercise.
While the DMK has approached the Supreme Court questioning the legality and implementation of the nationwide SIR process, opposition parties allege that the ruling party is simultaneously influencing the revision work at the grassroots level in Tamil Nadu. According to critics, the DMK is legally opposing the process even as it is allegedly participating in and shaping its execution on the ground.
Opposition leaders claim that party functionaries are interfering in voter verification—an administrative responsibility that lies solely with election officials. They argue that such involvement undermines the neutrality of the exercise and raises concerns about fairness and transparency.
Understanding the Special Intensive Revision
The Election Commission is empowered under law to prepare and revise electoral rolls periodically to ensure their accuracy. Revisions are usually undertaken ahead of elections or whenever required to correct discrepancies. The Special Intensive Revision is a focused exercise aimed at addressing issues such as duplicate voter entries, migration, and the continued presence of deceased individuals on electoral lists.
The stated objective of SIR is to ensure that all eligible citizens are included while removing ineligible names. It also seeks to prevent multiple registrations of the same voter across different locations, thereby strengthening the integrity of the electoral process.
Allegations of Interference in Official Duties
Opposition parties have accused DMK-affiliated agents of interfering with the work of Booth Level Officers (BLOs), who are tasked with voter verification. According to complaints, BLOs are allegedly being pressured to hand over verification forms to Booth Level Agents (BLAs) linked to the ruling party.
In several areas, DMK agents are accused of distributing and collecting forms themselves. There are also allegations that forms are being filled out by party workers and submitted to election officials, effectively sidelining the official machinery. Opposition leaders claim this has allowed the ruling party to dominate the SIR process at the field level.
Formal complaints have reportedly been submitted to the Tamil Nadu Chief Electoral Officer and district election authorities. Leaders from the AIADMK, TVK and other opposition parties have approached the Election Commission, alleging undue influence over BLOs. AIADMK leaders have claimed that photographic evidence has been provided to support their allegations.
The Election Commission and the Tamil Nadu Chief Electoral Officer have rejected these claims, stating that no eligible voter can be removed without valid justification and that BLOs function independently of political parties. Officials have maintained that safeguards are in place to ensure fairness. However, opposition parties continue to insist that the ruling party exerts control at the grassroots level.
Supreme Court Proceedings and Observations
Amid the controversy, the DMK filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the nationwide SIR exercise. The apex court sought a response from the Election Commission and directed High Courts across the country not to entertain similar petitions, consolidating all related matters before itself.
The DMK argued that the SIR process violated Election Commission guidelines and could result in large-scale deletion of voters, particularly from marginalised communities. However, during hearings related to the SIR exercise in Bihar, the Supreme Court upheld the Election Commission’s authority to conduct such a revision.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Jayamalya Bagchi observed that SIR is a special revision, distinct from routine updates, and that the ECI has the power to undertake such exercises provided they are fair and transparent. The court noted that procedural concerns, if any, could be addressed but held that the entire exercise could not be declared illegal.
Impact of SIR Across Tamil Nadu
The SIR aims to remove names of deceased voters, eliminate duplicate and fake entries, delete records of permanently migrated individuals, and add eligible voters who were previously omitted. In Chennai, officials said a large number of entries were flagged during the initial phase due to deaths, migration and duplication.
In the Royapuram constituency, around 400 names are expected to be removed. Polling officials in Old Washermanpet reported that nearly 400 out of 1,500 registered voters could not be traced, with many confirmed deaths and relocations. Similar issues were reported in areas such as Shanmugarayan Street, West Jafferkhanpet, Chepauk, Virugambakkam and Velachery.
According to the Greater Chennai Corporation, which manages voter data for nearly 40 lakh residents, around 37 lakh verification forms have been distributed so far. Final deletions will be carried out only after verification by Electoral Registration Officers.
In Tirunelveli district, officials indicated that approximately 78,000 entries may be removed due to deaths, fake registrations and migration. District Collector Sukumar said the exercise would help ensure an accurate and updated electoral roll.
Political Reactions
Opposition parties have accused the DMK of politicising the SIR process by creating fear among voters instead of spreading awareness. They allege that people are being warned that their names could be removed, potentially discouraging voter participation.
While election authorities and the Supreme Court have largely supported the SIR exercise, opposition parties continue to criticise the DMK for what they describe as a contradictory approach—challenging the process in court while allegedly influencing its implementation on the ground.
Source: https://www.oneindia.com/chennai/dmk-faces-double-stand-allegations-over-voter-list-revision-7959530.html
