The Special Intensive Revision of the electoral rolls, or the infamous SIR, has been rocking the country. The Chief Election Commission, Gyanesh Kumar, is in the eye of a storm after an Indian Express report exposed the internal differences in the Election Commission of India.
Several decisions taken unilaterally by CEC Gyanesh Kumar were questioned. Questions were also raised about the SIR exercise, which has led to the deletion of crores of names of voters.
Here, one thing that we have to keep in mind is that the Election Commission decides on the voting rights of people and not their citizenship. But the way the SIR exercise is being held and the way the current central government is treating those whose names have been deleted from the electoral rolls are preposterous. The Supreme Court has also taken note of it and the Opposition has approached the court questioning the CEC’s role in all this.
Glitches and stories of harassment of citizens have been reported from every state where SIR has been conducted. For instance, in West Bengal, where the Assembly elections took place in April, there were reports that 91% of the disenfranchised voters who approached the SIR appellate tribunals have been added back to the electoral rolls. If the percentage of reinstatement of deleted names is so high, then what was the reason for the deletions just before the election, which was won by BJP.
In Goa, 97 valid voters were left out and the Election Commission’s ECINET website blocked ground-level Electoral Registration Officers who wanted to add these names to the list.
In Karnataka, reports emerged that minority voters were specifically targeted.
In Meghalaya too, the problems have been aplenty. Here, the issue has two sides: the administrative difficulties being experienced by some voters on the ground, and the growing national controversy surrounding the functioning of the Election Commission.
The Congress has argued that the reported disagreements raise concerns about the way decisions were being taken within the three-member Commission. The party has linked the issue to its broader allegations concerning voter-roll changes and the SIR exercise.
In Meghalaya, Booth Level Officers, or BLOs, conducted house-to-house visits and distributed Enumeration Forms. The draft electoral roll was published on August 5, 2026. The Chief Electoral Officer’s office has also provided lists of people whose names appeared in the 2025 electoral roll but were not included in the 2026 draft roll.
However, as the process moved into verification and hearings, some residents in different localities began reporting difficulties.
Among the concerns being raised are cases involving documentation. In one reported instance, a woman around 60 years old was asked to produce a birth certificate. Other residents have reported being asked for documents such as Scheduled Tribe certificates.
These individual cases should be treated as reported experiences rather than proof that the same documents are being demanded from every voter across Meghalaya. Nevertheless, they illustrate a practical difficulty: older residents may not necessarily possess documents that were issued or commonly used decades ago, and obtaining old records can itself be a complicated process.
There have also been allegations in some localities that Enumeration Forms handed over to BLOs were not subsequently reflected as submitted or processed. Such claims require verification from the concerned BLOs and election authorities. But where a voter believes a form has been submitted and the record does not appear in the system, the issue can create considerable uncertainty for that individual.
The Election Commission finally extended the date for publishing the final list from October 21 to October 26.
After the nationwide outrage, the Commission has announced procedural measures aimed at greater transparency, including advance circulation of meeting agendas and recording of official minutes. It also ordered a review of the ECINet electoral-management system.
The political controversy has now reached the streets of Shillong.
On September 25, Meghalaya Congress workers led by MPCC president Vincent H. Pala marched from Congress Bhavan towards the Additional Secretariat. The Shillong protest formed part of wider Congress demonstrations across the country demanding action against the Chief Election Commissioner over the SIR controversy.
The SIR debate in Meghalaya, and the rest of the country, is no longer simply about the technical revision of a voter list. It has become a story about how electoral verification works at the household level, how effectively BLOs and election officials communicate with citizens, and how easily genuine voters can resolve discrepancies.
Apart from that, there is an urgent need to fix accountability. And so far, the CEC, who had been so vocal against the Congress’ claims of ‘vote chori’, has remained silent. The government too has not made a strong statement against the CEC. Does that mean that there was a collusion between the ruling party and the CEC?
If the Union Education Minister could resign following the mismanagement of NEET examinations, then why shouldn’t the CEC step down after crores of citizens faced harassment and anxiety? Most importantly, why shouldn’t the entire procedure of SIR be scrapped when questioned have been raised about statutes?
The SIR story is unfolding, making it an issue that directly connects the functioning of an important constitutional institution with the everyday voting rights of ordinary citizens. Now, every citizen of the country is waiting to see whether democracy can withstand the political muscle power.
WATCH OTHER VIDEOS
