Bihar SIR: Supreme Court calls for paralegals to help voters submit objections to exclusion

The Supreme Court on Monday requested the Chairman of the Bihar State Legal Services Authority to depute para legal volunteers to assist voters and political parties in submitting online claims, objections or corrections to the electoral roll being prepared as part of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar electoral rolls.

However, a Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymlaya Bagchi refrained from issuing any direction to extend the deadline for submitting such claims beyond September 1 (today).

This was after the Election Commission of India (ECI) assured that even objections sent after today would be considered before the electoral roll is finalised.

The Court recorded the ECI's submission that this process will continue till the last date for submitting names of nominees intending to stand for the upcoming State Assembly elections.

"The process of consideration of claims will continue till the last date of nominations. Let the claims/objections be continued to be filed," its order said.

The Court added,

"We also find that there are seriously disputed question of facts with regard to the submission on acceptance of the claims/ objections. With a view to facilitate the voters who are the central issue in these proceedings, we request the deputy chairman of the Bihar state legal services authority to issue instructions, preferably by tomorrow before noon, to depute/ notify para legal volunteers. They will assist the voters/ political parties for online submission of claims/ objections/ corrections. Each para legal volunteer (PLV) will then submit a confidential report to the chairman to the District Legal Services Authority. This information so collected from the PLV may be collated at the level of State Legal Services Authority for further consideration."

The Court was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Bihar SIR exercise.

During the last hearing on August 22, the Court had said that people excluded from the draft electoral roll can submit Aadhaar card along with the requisite form to object to their exclusion.

This effectively meant that Aadhaar can be used as proof to get oneself included in the voters' list.

The Court had further asked political parties to assist the people who have been excluded from the draft electoral roll. It expressed surprise at the submission that only two objections have come from BLAs of political parties.

During today's hearing of the matter, the Court reiterated that Aadhaar has to be given its due weightage as an identity verification document.

"We have to be clear about Section 9 of the Aadhar card. Whatever value has been attached to the Aadhaar card has to be acknowledged," Justice Kant said.

Appearing for the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), advocate Prashant Bhushan argued that voters need to be informed about which documents the ECI has formally acknowledged receiving, before they may decide on whether to submit Aadhaar as well while making an objection or a claim.

"They have not given the voters what has been received from them. Unless I know that…. They didn’t accept Aadhar in the first stage ...Suppose I have not attached any document. They are saying any body who has submitted the form is in the draft list. Our assertion is many of those forms are not filled by the voters themselves," Bhushan said.

ECI counsel, Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi replied that voters would be notified of any document discrepancy within seven days.

"99.5% of 7.24 crore (voters) have submitted documents. Most of the political parties are filing applications only for deletion and not for inclusion," Dwivedi said.

The Court, in turn, expressed concern over whether notice of such discrepancies would be given in a timely manner.

"Suppose today you are able to verify 1000 voters. And suppose in 100 you find there are discrepancies. Will you wait till 25th September to disclose that?" Justice Kant asked.

"No, that will take 7 days. It is an ongoing process," Dwivedi answered.

He went on to add,

"The filing of claims or objections or corrections is not barred after 1st September. They will be considered after the electoral role has been finalised. All inclusions and exclusions will be integrated into the final roll ... They can keep on filing after 30th September. They will all be considered."

He urged the Court not to formally extend any of the present deadlines for the ongoing exercise, as it may lead to SIR becoming an unending process.

"They (ECI) are saying that these people who apply after 1st September, their names will not be reflected in the roll created on 30th September, but it may be corrected…. When we are asking for extension of time, it is extension of some time may be till 10th," Bhushan urged in response.

He also pointed out that the recent floods in Bihar may have delayed the process of submitting claims for some voters.

"The order asking to publish the list with reasons was uploaded on 17th August. Then the Aadhar inclusion order came. Now there are also floods in Bihar. They (ECI) are not following their own manual for transparency. I don’t know what is there in my form ... they are asking everybody whose name is not in the roll to fill up form 6," Bhushan said.

"People don’t have a problem. Only ADR has a problem. They are all filling form 6," Dwivedi retorted.

Advocate Nizam Pasha (also for the petitioners' side) weighed in by arguing that the ECI is refusing to take any form except Form 6.

"They are refusing to accept a form for inclusion/ exclusion and only accepting form 6 which talks about fresh inclusion. When the documents are filed let it be reflected online. They are changing it," Pasha said.

Dwivedi denied this allegation.

"This is all misleading. We are giving the new forms. Every week it is being provided to the political parties also," he said.

The Court eventually decided to enlist the help of paralegal volunteers to smoothen this process.

"We can ask district legal services authorities to deploy para legal volunteers to help fill up the forms," Justice Kant said, before passing an order to this effect.

Senior Advocate Shoeb Alam, representing the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) party, was also among those who argued today.

"They are saying that 36 claims came from BLAs filed by RJD - (this) is misleading. Please see my IA. On affidavit. They are saying I only have 10 claims," Alam said.

"But your own IA says 36," the Court noted.

"The problem really is in the lack of transparency," Bhushan added.

"Problem is in the mindset, which is to disrupt," Dwivedi retorted.

Notably, in an earlier hearing of the matter, the Court was informed that 65 lakh names had been dropped from the draft electoral roll published on August 1. The ECI, however, assured that no name would be deleted without prior notice, an opportunity of hearing, and a reasoned order by the competent authority.

On August 14, the Court directed the Commission to upload the list of 65 lakh voters proposed to be deleted during the SIR. On August 22 the Court was informed that this direction had been complied with. The Court also directed that those whose names have been deleted can submit Aadhaar to show proof of their identity while objection to such deletion.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan today urged the Court to extend this relief to others as well.

"65 lakh, your lordships said Aadhar (can be given). Your lordships have limited (such relief) …. We are saying, whenever (someone) is responding, (ECI) may look at the Aadhar. Please extend it to everyone who is receiving notice, instead of restricting it to 65 lakhs," he said.

The Court, however, was not inclined to do so for now.

"If beyond 65 lakh, they are not accepting, then we are here. We will meet again on 8th September," Justice Kant said.