The Politics of Exclusion: Disenfranchising Bihar’s Marginalised
- CPI National
- Jul 18
- 4 min read
The Election Commission of India has launched a sweeping Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. Though presented as a legitimate administrative effort to update voter data ahead of the Assembly elections, the move has attracted sharp social criticism and legal challenges. The Commission has initiated door-to-door verification of voter records across the state, demanding submission of multiple documents including personal and parental proof of age and residence, particularly for those born after 2003. While the stated purpose is to remove inaccuracies and eliminate ineligible voters, the exercise stands out for its timing, intensity and severe implications for already vulnerable populations.
Opposition parties, civil rights groups and constitutional experts have raised serious concerns. Bihar has one of the highest concentrations of working people and marginalised communities in the country, many of whom are under-documented and live in conditions that make it impossible to maintain consistent paper trails. For migrant workers, Dalits, Adivasis and the rural poor, furnishing documents that prove not just their own eligibility but that of their parents within a month’s notice is an almost insurmountable challenge. These groups now face the prospect of disenfranchisement not due to fraud or manipulation but due to systemic inequality and administrative insensitivity. The scale and pace of this process, during the monsoon season and across difficult terrain, virtually guarantees errors and exclusions. This fear was echoed in the Supreme Court when a sitting judge observed during proceedings that even someone of his stature would struggle to produce the kind of documentation now being demanded.
This observation from the judiciary came during the ongoing hearings on the constitutional validity and timing of the Special Intensive Revision. The author of this article is also a petitioner before the Supreme Court, part of a collective legal challenge to the SIR by ten opposition parties. The Supreme Court has taken note of our apprehensions and has asked pointed questions to the Election Commission, including on the timing of the exercise. Further, the Supreme Court has also asked the ECI to consider other documents like Aadhaar Card, Ration Card and the EPIC, which is issued by the ECI itself, for the SIR. The very fact that the judiciary had to step in an exercise that should have been routine and inclusive is a troubling sign.
What makes this exercise even more suspect is its political context. The Bharatiya Janata Party, which has ruled at the Centre for over a decade and has all but eclipsed all other parties in Bihar’s ruling alliance, has continuously devised new methods to retain power in politically crucial states like Bihar. Whether through orchestrated defections, covert encouragement of splinter groups, or manipulation of alliances, the BJP has shown an unwillingness to respect electoral uncertainty. With its position weakening in Bihar and the opposition Mahagathbandhan gaining strength, the Special Intensive Revision appears to be the newest instrument in this playbook. The demand for complex documentation will disproportionately affect voters who are less likely to support the BJP, the poor, Dalits, minorities and migrant workers. What is being portrayed as a neutral administrative measure is, in fact, deeply political.
While the Election Commission has defended the process as constitutionally mandated and necessary under the Representation of the People Act, these claims do not fully hold up to scrutiny. No such intensive revision was undertaken in other states that recently went to polls. The electoral rolls in Bihar had already been updated for the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. A limited update to include new eligible voters would have sufficed. The Election Commission is yet to offer a clear explanation for the unexplained surge in the number of voters before the Maharashtra elections. This selective use of revisions raises questions about whether these exercises are being conducted impartially. Most tellingly, BJP spokespersons have been far more enthusiastic in defending the Special Intensive Revision than the Commission itself. This creates the impression that the Commission, while formally neutral, is presiding over an exercise whose political consequences are highly skewed.
This perception has been strengthened by recent changes in the appointment process of Election Commissioners. The Union Government now holds the sole authority to appoint the Chief Election Commissioner and other Commissioners, a move that weakens the structural independence of the institution. In public forums and press interactions, the Commission has failed to assert its autonomy with the kind of firmness shown in the past. It is worth recalling that former Chief Election Commissioner T N Seshan deliberately stopped using the term "Government of India" in Commission communication to underline its institutional independence from the Executive. Today, such symbolic and substantive measures are largely absent, and public confidence in the Commission's impartiality is eroding as a result.
The timing of the Bihar revision is particularly telling. With only months to go before elections are to be announced, lakhs of voters are now scrambling to confirm their inclusion on the rolls. Many face uncertainty, confusion and fear. In a democracy, no citizen should be in doubt about their right to vote. Yet in Bihar today, this doubt has been manufactured, not resolved, by the very institution meant to protect electoral rights. The revision has come as a shock to voters who had already voted in the 2024 general elections and are now being asked to once again prove their eligibility. The burden of proof has unfairly shifted to the citizen, and the consequences will likely be felt most by those already marginalised by the system.
The BJP now appears to be relying on two strategies in Bihar. The first is the mass exclusion of voters through an exercise that targets the poor and the undocumented. The second is the communalisation of the political atmosphere to polarise voters along religious lines. These twin tactics are not new, but their combination in Bihar is particularly dangerous. The Mahagathbandhan must resist both, not only through legal avenues but also by mobilising politically and socially. This is not simply a question of electoral arithmetic; it is a question of democratic legitimacy. The right to vote for an eligible citizen is not a privilege that should be filtered through bureaucratic red tape. It is a right and any attempt to limit it under the pretext of administrative reform must be challenged firmly and decisively. The people of Bihar are no strangers to struggle, and this latest battle must be fought not just at the doors of the court but at the doorsteps of every citizen.
Comments