The recent press conference (PC) of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and his statements have made a hot topic in the country’s politics about the special intensive revision (SIR) and voter list in Bihar. Opposition parties, especially the leaders of the India alliance, have raised many questions about the statements of the Election Commissioner. The opposition feels that the ruling BJP government can be defeated in the elections by setting a native against the Election Commission. On this basis, there are also reports on Monday that the opposition can also bring impeachment in Parliament against Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. Meaning there is complete preparation to make sesame palm palm with Gyanesh Kumar. It is obvious that the opposition is also very successful in this campaign.
1. Accused of doing politics by keeping a gun on the shoulder of the Election Commission
Dnyanesh Kumar said in his press conference that some political parties are doing politics by targeting voters by placing guns on the shoulders of the Election Commission. This statement was in response to the allegations of the opposition, stating that a conspiracy to evade vote theft is being hatched through special intensive revision (SIR) of the voter list in Bihar.
The opposition is very angry at this statement of the CEC. Because this was directly attacking opposition parties. The opposition feels that the Election Commission is behaving like a BJP spokesperson. The Congress and RJD have made it the basis to question the fairness of the Election Commission. He argues that the Election Commission should treat all parties equally. But if the Election Commissioner talks like this, then how will he feel that he is behaving fairly.
Dnyanesh Kumar’s words are not feeling good to the opposition, but there can be no two opinions in this that Kumar’s words are moral and legally correct. It is an insult to democracy and constitution making serious allegations like vote theft without evidence. Who does not know whether Bihar or any part of the country has always been disturbed in the voter list there. In Bihar, the neighborhoods of the locality have been deprived of voting on the occasion. Now the era has changed. Every voter is cautious about his vote. The opposition is showing the truth to a great extent in the matter of targeting the BJP by placing a gun on the Election Commission on the issue of vote theft. In order to win the election, the opposition should focus on the BJP’s election promises, development works in the last years and the siege on law and order etc.
2- Question of sharing CCTV footage
The issue of sharing CCTV footage is the issue of CCTV footage sharing in the statements of Gyanesh Kumar on the special intensive revision (SIR) of the voter list in Bihar and the allegations of vote theft. Kumar raised the question whether the Election Commission should share CCTV videos of any voter, whether it is mother, daughter -in -law, daughter, be daughter? The statement was the answer to the opposition’s allegations in which pictures of some voters were shown in the media without permission as evidence of irregularities in the voter list.
Opposition, especially the parties of the India alliance such as Congress and Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), saw the statement of Dnyanesh Kumar as a strategy to divert attention from the original issue. His argument was that the real issue was the transparency of the voter list and the alleged irregularities in the SIR process, not the confidentiality of CCTV footage.
The opposition said that the Commission should take concrete steps to ensure transparency of the process. For example, making public the verification process public, the Commission started trying to divert public attention through emotional appeal. Gyanesh Kumar’s statement may be a moral and legal argument to protect the privacy of voters, but it cannot be solved the problem. It is true that the unauthorized use of voters’ photographs or individual information is a violation of their privacy, which is constitutional and morally incorrect. But due to this, transparency cannot be eliminated. The Commission will have to solve this problem.
By raising the question of CCTV footage, the Commission is avoiding serious questions that are linked to the alleged manipulation in the voter list. The Commission can separate themselves from the investigation of manipulation allegations for fear of getting public photos of women. The commission will have to find a middle way. Dnyanesh Kumar should have told that if a person accuses him of manipulation of voting, then he can be shown in person in the presence of present -day persons from both sides.
3- Mention of 45 days time limit
The Chief Election Commissioner said that after the Returning Officer declared the election results, any political party has the right to file an election petition in the Supreme Court within 45 days. If no irregularity is found during this period, it is not appropriate to make baseless allegations later. This statement was the answer to the opposition’s allegations, claiming alleged manipulation and vote theft in the voter list.
If the rule of 45 days of deadline remains, then the political parties of the country should not have pain in raising it. The commissioner tried to convey the message from his statement that the opposition did not take any legal action on time. This is absolutely correct. The opposition says that the issue of irregularities in the voter list is complex and it is wrong to limit it within the scope of only 45 days. It is only a strategy to surround the Election Commission.
We can see this in Rajanna’s statement of the statement of the dismissed minister of Karnataka. Rajanna had clearly stated that why the Karnataka government slept when votes were being held in Mahadevpura. While there was a Congress government in the state. Similarly, the Election Commission in Bihar has published voter list and has asked political parties to explain but more than two weeks has passed, but no party has lodged any objection so far.
4- Revealed the address with zero number
Gyanesh Kumar clarified the issue of zero number address and said that zero numbers are recorded in front of the address of crores of people in the country. The reason for this is that the panchayat or municipality has not allotted any specific numbers to many houses. Especially in unauthorized colonies or rural areas, where no official number is given to the houses, booth level officers (BLOs) enter zero numbers in the address column in the voter list.
It is the misfortune of the country that till date there is no address of crores of people in the country. Those who have a house of their own have no address. It is understood that those who do not have their own house, their number is recorded, but they are also fascinated by a address. Because their colony is either unnecessary or has a place where the address has not yet been allotted due to administrative negligence.
The opposition has no reason to consider the arguments of Dnyanesh Kumar inadequate. The point highlighted the complications of voter registration in rural and unauthorized colonies, which is a challenge in diverse countries like India.
5- Long demand for improvement in voter list
Gyanesh Kumar said that for the last two decades, various political parties have been demanding improvement in voter list. To fulfill this demand, the process of special intensive revision (SIR) was started in Bihar. He also told that this process has been done in the country more than 10 times in the first, and its main objective is to purify the voter list. The opposition cannot deny what Gyanesh Kumar said.
Whatever allegations Rahul Gandhi has made till date, they have to stop again in future, then SIR will have to be trusted. Whether it is to show the living people dead or how will it be stopped at the same address. The only solution for that is the intensive revision process of the voter list. Gyanesh Kumar insisted that in the SIR process, 1.6 lakh booth level agents (BLA) have prepared a draft voter list with various political parties. This process is completely transparent, in which BLOs and voters provide certification and signs, as well as video testimonials. He also said that it is a matter of concern that certified documents and BLA information at the grassroots level is not reaching their state or national level leaders, or is being deliberately ignored.
—- End —-