newspop
Kolkata: Former West Bengal Chief Minister and Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee on Saturday intensified her criticism of the Election Commission over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, alleging that the exercise was carried out in a manner intended to help the BJP gain an advantage in West Bengal by removing the names of valid voters.
Banerjee accused the poll panel of deleting genuine voters from the electoral rolls and said the recent reports about differences within the three-member Election Commission had brought what she described as the “truth” about the exercise to light. She also demanded the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, escalating the political confrontation over the voter-list revision ahead of the upcoming electoral process in the state.
The controversy intensified after an Indian Express investigation reported that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had raised formal objections on several occasions over aspects of the SIR process, including issues concerning voter deletions, additions and changes to electoral-roll procedures.
However, the Election Commission has rejected the suggestion of an internal rift, stating on Saturday that decisions related to the SIR were approved unanimously by all three Election Commissioners and that the changes made to Form 6, used for voter enrolment, had been upheld by the Supreme Court.
The Commission has maintained that the SIR process is part of its electoral-roll revision responsibilities, while opposition parties have raised concerns over the possible exclusion of eligible voters. The issue has now become a major political flashpoint, with several opposition leaders also calling for accountability from the poll panel.
Meanwhile, the Election Commission’s clarification and the ongoing legal proceedings surrounding electoral-roll revisions are expected to remain central to the debate over the SIR exercise in West Bengal. The allegations made by Banerjee remain political claims, while the Election Commission has publicly disputed the interpretation that its decisions reflected an internal breakdown or partisan objective.
