Electoral Integrity Forum seeks immediate halt to SIR 2.0, calls for mandatory social audit

By A Representative 

The Forum for Electoral Integrity has urged the Election Commission of India (ECI) to immediately pause the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) 2.0 of electoral rolls, warning that the exercise is generating widespread distress and may result in unlawful exclusion of valid voters. In a memorandum dated November 20, 2025, addressed to the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners, M.G. Devasahayam, Convener of the Forum for Electoral Integrity and Coordinator of the Citizens’ Commission on Elections, called the process legally unsound, administratively disruptive, and constitutionally problematic.

Devasahayam states that SIR 2.0 suspends the status of already verified electors, subjects them to a fresh document-heavy verification, and attempts a near-complete re-creation of electoral rolls to identify “disqualified electors,” despite such procedures being fully governed by the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. He argues that the SIR process is extra-statutory and directly contrary to Rule 8 and Form 4, which already provide the required mechanism for inclusion, deletion, verification and correction.

According to the memorandum, the process disproportionately burdens millions of existing electors who are already validly enrolled, and violates Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution by shifting the statutory responsibility of enrolment from the ECI to citizens and informal volunteers. Devasahayam notes that nationwide protests and the recent suicides of three Booth Level Officers reflect the serious strains placed on field-level staff.

He states that universal adult suffrage is being transformed into a conditional privilege dependent on navigating bureaucratic obstacles, undermining the principle that legitimate governance rests on the consent of all citizens. Devasahayam contends that there is neither a legislative vacuum nor an administrative necessity to justify such an exercise.

The memorandum argues that if the ECI wishes to undertake any intensive revision, it must do so through a Social Audit mechanism, which is constitutionally grounded under Articles 243A and 243J and widely institutionalised across several laws such as the MGNREGA and the Food Security Act. He notes that social audits offer an open, community-based verification process that minimises manipulation and maximises inclusion.

Devasahayam points out that the ECI’s own “Manual on Electoral Rolls” (2023) mandates features of social audit, including reading out draft rolls in Gram Sabha and Ward Committee meetings. He also cites the precedent from 2003 under former Chief Election Commissioner J.M. Lyngdoh, when decentralised social audits were conducted in five states, leading to extensive corrections—over seven lakh in Rajasthan alone.

The memorandum proposes a structured social audit framework involving advance disclosure of electoral rolls, door-to-door enumeration with Form 6, display of claims and objections, public Jan Sunwai hearings with mandatory participation of Electoral Registration Officers and relevant officials, open testimonies, video-recording, and time-bound speaking orders. It also calls for continuous digital access to updated electoral rolls in multiple searchable formats.

Devasahayam urges the ECI to halt SIR 2.0 immediately and proceed only after framing and notifying rules that mandate a full social audit before finalising electoral rolls. A copy of the memorandum has been sent to the Chief Electoral Officer of Tamil Nadu with a request to pursue the matter further.