An institution that earned the reputation of a fair umpire over the years is now being seen as partisan, a former election commissioner lamented on Tuesday.
“The Election Commission is faced with very serious objections that amount to illegality. Let us see what view the Supreme Court takes. But for citizens, the commission was an institution trusted for 75 years. It earned prestige around the world. Now, seeing the massive street protests, I think this is extremely unfortunate for democracy,” said Ashok Lavasa, a former election commissioner of India.
“In an electoral democracy, you need a fair umpire. If people feel the umpire is not fair, aspersions are cast on the winning team. My fervent hope is that the EC should regain credibility and the trust of people,” Lavasa said, speaking virtually at a citizens’ convention in central Calcutta against the contentious SIR.
Lavasa, now a public policy thinker, writer and commentator, recalled the role of a “model umpire” from Bengal.
He said: “West Bengal gifted to India Sukumar Sen, the first chief election commissioner…. Sen took one and a half years, went to all the districts to see if the lists included all eligible voters. Now, the pattern seems to have changed…. The new purpose seems to exclude people on the basis of suspicion.”
“From an inclusive approach, a friendly approach, in the 1950s, the priority now is to weed out people it (EC) thinks ineligible,” Lavasa said.
Sen served as the first chief election commissioner from March 21, 1950, to December 19, 1958.
Under his leadership, the EC organised and oversaw independent India’s first two general elections in 1951-52 and 1957 for the Lok Sabha and the Assemblies.
He steered the massive electoral exercise for over 17 crore eligible voters when an overwhelming majority of the population was illiterate, and computers were a far cry.
Thanks to people like Sen, the EC was widely held up as a global exemplar for conducting elections in the world’s largest democracy. The tenure of chief election commissioner T.N. Seshan in the 1990s cemented a legacy of institutional fearlessness — strictly enforcing the model code of conduct, curbing illegal campaign expenditures, and actively challenging political overreach.
But the same commission, under its current chief Gyanesh Kumar, is now facing unprecedented allegations of purging the electoral rolls through a controversial SIR drive to favour the Narendra Modi-Amit Shah regime.
The commission and the Centre vehemently deny the allegations. The Supreme Court is seized of the matter.
Lavasa spoke at length on the SIR in Bengal. “Some 60 lakh were marked under adjudication. But what logical discrepancy meant, what were its implications and parameters were never shared with people. This is confusing and non-transparent. Discrepancy can never mean disqualification. Not the least by the EC.”
Lavasa cited another ignoble “first”.
“Out of 38 lakh appeals in the appellate tribunals, over 16 lakh were against inclusion of names. In India’s history, after the final rolls are published, there has never been such a large number of appeals against inclusions. It is like a blot on the intention of the commission,” he said.
Actor-activist Prakash Raj, who also spoke virtually, called the SIR the “most dangerous act by this regime trying to kill our democracy”.
Former bureaucrat Jawhar Sircar and senior advocate and CPM leader Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya were co-conveners of the meet.
The programme was held in an open space on AJC Bose Road, opposite Pratt Memorial School.
It was initially planned at Kalamandir on Theatre Road. But permission was revoked at the last minute, allegedly citing a technical glitch. Before that, a news conference was planned at the Academy of Fine Arts. The authorities revoked the permission there as well, this time citing anti-government activities.
Bhattacharyya said the voter deletion reeked of autocracy and fear in the minds of the rulers.
“The idea of one person, one vote is anathema for the Modi regime. They want to take away the votes of Muslims, Dalits, SCs, STs and all other marginalised people,” he said.
Sircar, a former chief electoral officer of Bengal, said it was “startling that an AI-powered software was entrusted with adding and deleting names”.
“You are a creature of the act, not the master,” he said of Gyanesh, referring to the laws that govern the transaction of business of the poll panel and conduct of elections in India.
Anita Agnihotri, former bureaucrat and author, also stressed the inclusive nature of the commission before. “As district magistrates, we were instructed to give voting rights to as many marginalised people as possible, making them a part of the electoral process. Now, it is completely reversed. The intention seems to be to strike off as many people as you can. It is shameful,” she said.
Samik Bandyopadhyay, academic, literary critic and theatre expert, looked back at the origins of fascism in Italy over 100 years ago and drew several parallels with today’s India.
Former vice-chancellor of Jadavpur University, Ashok Nath Basu, said the Constitution gives us the right to protest peacefully against the government.
“Now, the responsibility to protect the Constitution is upon us. The government will not do it,” he said.