Voter's Citizenship

The Election Commission's intensive revision of the voter list in Bihar is still ongoing, as voters can submit their claims throughout August. The final voter list will be published on September 30, but the current list shows that 6.5 million names have been removed from the total 79 million voters in Bihar. This decision is being strongly opposed by the country's opposition parties, who claim that the Election Commission is aggressively removing voter names under the guise of revision. Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi argues that this issue concerns the principle of one citizen-one vote, which is fundamental to India's democracy. The opposition contends that the Election Commission lacks the authority to verify a person's citizenship, as the Constitution only empowers it to conduct free and fair elections. There is no doubt that the Election Commission does not have the right to verify citizenship. New voters must provide an undertaking affirming their Indian citizenship to cast their vote.

The Election Commission has amended its conditions in this regard and is asking citizens for such forms which confirm their citizenship. Several petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court regarding in-depth review, the hearing of which is going on. During this hearing, the affected party argued in the court that the job of deciding citizenship is of the Union Home Ministry. In favor of this argument, the bench of two judges hearing the court has agreed and said that the job of making citizenship law is of the Parliament of India. Only the Parliament can make laws in this regard. Therefore, it can be concluded that the Election Commission cannot raise a question mark on the citizenship of any voter. By doing so, it goes beyond its jurisdiction. Whereas on the other hand, the Constitution of India says that every adult valid voter has the right to vote. According to this, the names of people in the voter list of Bihar should increase instead of decreasing, but the reasons given by the Election Commission in the context of the names of 65 lakh voters deleted seem justified.

The commission says that after 2003, lakhs of people have left Bihar and migrated to other places, lakhs of people have died and the names of lakhs of people are included in the voter list at two places. The court has accepted these arguments of its, which seems completely legitimate. But with this, there is also an argument that how many voters have increased in Bihar after 2003. Because the Election Commission has considered the year 2003 as the base year. This year the voter list was revised in Bihar, but the question associated with it is that the Lok Sabha elections held in the year 2024 were held on the basis of the old voter list. Opposition leaders are saying that were these elections held on the basis of the wrong list? The Election Commission is not answering this. But it is saying that no legitimate voter can be identified on the basis of Aadhaar card or old voter identity card. The Supreme Court has accepted this argument of its as correct and said that both the identity cards are not certificates of citizenship. Even the court is not considering the ration card as a certificate of citizenship. Of course, it is true that since it is written on the Aadhar card itself, it is not a proof of citizenship. Fake ration cards are also made in India and Aadhar cards are used to make them. The same problem exists with the old voter ID card. Hence, the arguments of the Election Commission seem to carry weight but this is not the answer to the right question because the Constitution says that the Election Commission does not have the right to check citizenship. Before it, an affidavit of any person stating that he is a citizen of India is sufficient. If someone challenges his citizenship, then it is the responsibility of the challenger to prove it.

The citizenship of individuals who have resided in India for generations should not be questioned merely due to the lack of documentation. Many from older generations did not possess birth or school certificates. If the Commission demands these documents now, how can it be deemed legitimate? In Bihar, the Election Commission requests such certificates from those born after 1987. This raises the question of whether the Election Commission has the authority to determine a person's citizenship. India's electoral system is inclusive, not exclusive. While deceased individuals' names should be removed from the voter list, those over 18 should be added. The primary concern is whether the Election Commission has the authority to conduct intensive revisions, as no election law mentions such revisions. However, it is true that the Election Commission regularly updates the voter list. This issue is also a fundamental question before the court.