The petitioner side challenging the constitutionality of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise claimed in the Supreme Court on Tuesday that the Election Commission of India has morphed into a “despot” that has transformed a “suspicion” about the purity of the electoral roll into a massive countrywide survey which may not only lead to disenfranchisement but also statelessness for many.
“Can suspicion lead to not only disenfranchisement but statelessness? A doubt, a suspicion leading to statelessness. What is the basis of this power?” advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for the petitioners, asked during her submissions before a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant.
She argued that the SIR frustrated the vision of the Constitution by allowing en masse scrutiny of citizenship by the Election Commission based on executive order rather than parliamentary legislation.
The Election Commission (EC), on the other hand, has asserted its authority to “assess citizenship” for the purpose of registration in electoral rolls. The poll body has maintained that its plenary power to scrutinise citizenship flows directly from Article 324, which empowers it to supervise and control the conduct of elections. It has also contended that the authority of Parliament to make laws on elections under Article 327 must align with the EC’s plenary powers.
