Why Did the ECI Receive No Complaints from Political Parties?

Click to start listening
Why Did the ECI Receive No Complaints from Political Parties?

Synopsis

The Election Commission of India has reported no formal complaints from political parties about the electoral rolls revision despite their ongoing criticisms. This has raised questions about the accuracy of allegations made by opposition leaders. Individual voters have actively engaged, filing thousands of claims and requests.

Key Takeaways

  • Zero formal complaints reported by political parties.
  • 28,370 applications filed by individual voters.
  • Political parties appointed 1,60,813 Booth Level Agents.
  • No names can be deleted from draft rolls without a formal order.
  • First-time voters play a significant role with 1,03,703 applications.

New Delhi, Aug 15 (NationPress) Despite ongoing criticism from Opposition parties regarding the current Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has revealed that it has not received any formal complaints from political parties concerning claims and objections to the draft rolls.

In stark contrast, the ECI noted that individual voters have submitted 28,370 applications for inclusion or exclusion.

According to the ECI’s daily bulletin dated August 15, which covers the timeframe from August 1 (3 p.m.) to August 15 (9 a.m.), political parties have appointed 1,60,813 Booth Level Agents (BLAs). This includes 53,338 from the Bharatiya Janata Party, 47,506 from the Rashtriya Janata Dal, 36,550 from the Janata Dal (United), and 17,549 from the Indian National Congress, among others.

While no political party, even those in Opposition, has submitted claims or objections, individual voters have filed 28,370 requests. Out of these, 857 have already been resolved following the mandatory verification period.

The Commission has also received 1,03,703 applications from first-time voters aged 18 and above, including six processed through BLAs.

The ECI emphasized that claims and objections are reviewed by the respective Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) or Assistant Electoral Registration Officers (AEROs) only after a seven-day verification period. Importantly, no name can be removed from the draft rolls published on August 1 without a formal “speaking order” issued after thorough inquiry and providing the concerned individual an opportunity to be heard.

The lack of formal party complaints sharply contrasts the ongoing public accusations by Opposition leaders alleging bias and procedural irregularities in managing voter rolls. The data suggest that although parties are actively participating in the revision process through their BLAs, they have not formally challenged the integrity of the process before the ECI.

Point of View

It's essential to acknowledge the contrasting positions of political parties and the Election Commission of India. While criticism persists, the absence of formal complaints indicates a level of engagement that deserves attention. It serves as a reminder of the importance of active participation in democratic processes.
NationPress
07/09/2025

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Special Intensive Revision (SIR)?
The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) is a process undertaken by the Election Commission of India to update electoral rolls, ensuring accuracy and inclusion of eligible voters.
How many applications were filed by individual voters?
Individual voters filed a total of 28,370 applications for inclusion or exclusion in the electoral rolls.
What role do Booth Level Agents (BLAs) play?
Booth Level Agents (BLAs) assist political parties in the electoral process, helping to facilitate communication between voters and the Election Commission.
What happens to claims and objections?
Claims and objections are reviewed by Electoral Registration Officers after a seven-day verification process, ensuring due diligence before any action is taken.
Why is the absence of complaints significant?
The absence of formal complaints from political parties contrasts with their public criticisms and suggests a potential disconnect between claims made and the actual electoral process.