Did ECI Tamper with Electoral Rolls? Chidambaram’s Claims Debunked!
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The ECI has responded vigorously to P. Chidambaram's claims about electoral roll manipulations. The allegations of disenfranchisement and illegal categorization of voters have been firmly rebutted, emphasizing the integrity of the electoral process.
Key Takeaways
- The ECI has rejected claims of electoral roll tampering.
- Chidambaram's allegations were labeled as misleading.
- The electoral roll revision is conducted legally.
- Political leaders are urged to avoid misinformation.
- The SIR has not yet commenced in Tamil Nadu.
New Delhi, Aug 3 (NationPress) The Election Commission of India (ECI) has decisively countered the allegations put forth by senior Congress leader P. Chidambaram regarding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, labeling them as “misleading and baseless”.
In a recent post on social media platform X, Chidambaram expressed concerns over the supposed disenfranchisement of 65 lakh voters in Bihar and accused the ECI of adding 6.5 lakh individuals as voters in Tamil Nadu.
He argued that classifying migrant workers as “permanently migrated” is both alarming and potentially illegal, further alleging a political misuse of the electoral roll revision process.
In response, the ECI utilized its official fact-check account on X to clarify that according to Article 19(1)(e) of the Constitution, every citizen has the right to reside anywhere in India. Additionally, Section 19(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 permits an “ordinary resident” in a constituency to register as a voter there.
The Commission noted: “Thus, an individual originally from Tamil Nadu but ordinarily living in Delhi is entitled to register as a voter in Delhi. Likewise, a person from Bihar residing in Chennai can register as a voter there.”
Rejecting Chidambaram’s assertion of “permanent migration” being a tactic to manipulate voter rolls, the ECI emphasized that such categorization is in line with legal definitions under Section 20 of the RP Act.
“The exact figures regarding voters who have permanently moved from Bihar to other states and are ordinarily residents there will only be available after the SIR is conducted,” it added, urging political figures not to disseminate false information concerning the SIR process being undertaken by the ECI at a national level.
Furthermore, the ECI clarified that the SIR has not yet commenced in Tamil Nadu, making any connection between the data from Bihar and Tamil Nadu at this point “absurd”.
It called upon political leaders to refrain from spreading misinformation that could obstruct or politicize a Constitutionally mandated exercise.
“Such dissemination of falsehoods should be avoided,” the ECI asserted.
Point of View
It is crucial to uphold the integrity of the electoral process. The ECI's response to Chidambaram's allegations reinforces the need for accurate information to maintain public trust in democratic institutions. It is imperative for political figures to communicate responsibly, ensuring the public remains informed without fostering misinformation.
NationPress
01/09/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the allegations made by P. Chidambaram?
P. Chidambaram alleged that the ECI's electoral roll revision process disenfranchised 65 lakh voters in Bihar and improperly categorized migrant workers.
How did the ECI respond to these allegations?
The ECI labeled Chidambaram's claims as 'misleading and baseless,' asserting that the revision process is conducted in accordance with the law.
What legal basis supports the ECI's electoral roll practices?
The ECI references Article 19(1)(e) of the Constitution and Section 19(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which allow citizens to register as voters based on their ordinary residence.
Has the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) been implemented in Tamil Nadu?
The ECI clarified that the SIR has not yet been implemented in Tamil Nadu.
What was the ECI's stance on misinformation regarding the SIR?
The ECI urged political leaders to avoid spreading misinformation that could disrupt a Constitutionally mandated process.
