Skip to main content

ALIFA questions ECI's rejection of its plea on gender justice in SIR

By A Representative 
The All India Feminist Alliance (ALIFA), a constituent of the National Alliance of People's Movements (NAPM), has issued a rejoinder to the Election Commission of India (ECI), urging it to reconsider its response to the alliance's earlier representation on gender justice concerns arising from the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
In a letter addressed to the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners on July 10, ALIFA expressed dissatisfaction with a response it received from the ECI's Public Grievance Redressal System (PGRS) Cell on July 3. According to the alliance, the PGRS Cell informed it that its submission was "not related to the Election Commission of India" and therefore could not be processed, while directing it to the Commission's helpline.
ALIFA argued that its representation was directly related to the SIR process, which it said is being conducted by the ECI under Article 324 of the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act, 1950. The organisation maintained that concerns regarding the impact of the revision process on the voting rights of women and transgender persons fall squarely within the Commission's jurisdiction.
The alliance stated that its submission was not an individual voter grievance but a collective representation highlighting what it described as the disproportionate exclusion and documentation challenges faced by women and transgender persons during the electoral roll revision. It said that a standardised administrative response from the PGRS Cell did not address the substantive issues raised.
In its rejoinder, ALIFA questioned how its representation could be considered unrelated to the Commission's work and asked the ECI to clarify which authority, if not the Election Commission, was responsible for addressing concerns arising from the Special Intensive Revision.
The organisation also noted that the Election Commission had been a respondent before the Supreme Court in petitions concerning the SIR exercise and said that the Commission had appointed state-level observers in several states to address issues faced by voters during the revision process.
ALIFA has requested that its July 3 submission be placed before the Chief Election Commissioner, the Election Commissioners, and officials overseeing the SIR process. It has sought a substantive response to the issues it raised instead of what it described as an administrative closure.
Describing the matter as time-sensitive, the alliance said the ongoing revision could affect the voting rights of a large number of electors and urged the Commission to respond at the earliest.

Comments

Post a Comment

NOTE: Hateful, abusive comments won't be published. -- Editor

TRENDING

Sardar made up his mind on Pakistan in Dec 1946 "before" Mountbatten's Partition Plan

By Hari Desai* One has to be extra cautious while dealing with the history of towering personalities of the Indian freedom struggle, especially that of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel (October 31, 1875 - December 15, 1950). Present-day politicians prefer to "pronounce” on his life and quote him according to their convenience like a blind person describing an elephant.
2 comments
»

Beyond the Ayodhya theft: A tainted system, a crisis of trust

By Martin Macwan*   Recently, the issue of "theft of offerings at the Ayodhya Ram temple" has taken centre stage on social media. Whether "no theft occurred," or "this is the first such incident," or "the theft was limited only to cash" are now secondary questions, because the evidence has come not from the opposition, from people of other faiths, or from foreigners, but from ordinary devout believers, from saints and monks, and from sincere workers of the ruling party itself.
Post a Comment
»

The Guardian controversy and the moral question of 12 years of Modi's leadership

By Mohd Ziyauallah Khan    A recent opinion article published in The Guardian , titled "Can Narendra Modi Accept Any Medal?", reignited a fierce debate about Prime Minister Narendra Modi's international recognition and the moral legacy of his leadership. The article argued that while Modi has received numerous state honours and awards from foreign governments, a more fundamental question remains unanswered: Can a leader be celebrated internationally while presiding over growing concerns about democratic decline, social polarization , and civil liberties at home? The controversy quickly spread across political and media circles. Supporters dismissed the article as biased, while critics argued that it reflected concerns already expressed by international democracy watchdogs , human rights organizations, and sections of the global press. Yet beyond political loyalties lies a deeper question: How should the success of a government be measured, especially when it...
2 comments
»