The Election Commission has held an emergency meeting to determine the modus operandi for the producing of flawless and accurate voter list, but unfortunately they could not come to a consensus. Two members of the commission held the view that the Electoral Rolls Ordinance 1982 provides only for the revision of the rolls and not for the preparation of fresh rolls, and because of that they could not agree to the proposal of the Chief Election Commissioner for the preparation of fresh list.

Despite the disagreement with the members of the commission, the Chief Election Commissioner, having regard to the practice, procedures and tradition of the Election Commission, took unilateral decision to prepare fresh electoral rolls following the procedures adopted by the Commission in the past. He has done so presumably for the reason that the fresh rolls were prepared in the past by the commission as many as four times, which were accepted by the people with good grace. He therefore rejected the suggestion of two commissioners on the ground that it would be risky and perilous to revise the voter list, as this process was never tested by the Election Commission. He therefore decided unilaterally in the interest of greater degree of accuracy to prepare fresh rolls for use in the next general election.

Now let us see the circumstances leading to the promulgation of the Ordinance regulating the preparation of electoral rolls. It was promulgated by the Chief Martial Law Administrator for the production of fresh electoral rolls for primary use in the election planned to hold in the Union Parishads during the months of December 1983 and January1984. Apparently, the intention was to use the same rolls in the referendum scheduled to be held on March 21, 1985 seeking vote of confidence for continuance of HM Ershad as President. and for the parliamentary election to be held on April 26, 1986. As the preparation of fresh rolls for use in the referendum and the election to parliament appeared to be impossible due to the shortage of time, the lawmakers added Section 11 to the Ordinance, providing for the revision of the electoral rolls before each election.

Now let us examine Section 11 of the Electoral Rolls Ordinance, 1982. It says that "the electoral roll shall, unless otherwise directed by the Commission, for reasons to be recorded in writing, be revised in the prescribed manner (manner has been prescribed in Rule 21 of the Electoral Rolls Rules, 1982) by reference to the qualifying date (January 1 of the year of revision) before each election to an elective body (a body constituted through election)."

A careful scrutiny of this provision makes it clear even to a layman that the rolls shall be revised by the Registration Officer unless a directive has been issued by the commission contrary to it. This clearly means that the commission has the power under the law to adopt any other method other than revision in the interest of producing accurate voter list. The decision of the learned Chief Election Commissioner for the preparation of fresh voter list is not only consonant with the provision of the law, but also with the past tradition of the commission.

The commission has also power under the law to give clearance to the revision of the rolls by the Registration Officer, if it is satisfied that it would serve the best purpose. But revision is a very difficult task. It requires (Rule 21) publication of the current electoral rolls duly corrected by the Registration Officer by way of including therein the names of those who have become eligible for enrolment, and excluding therefrom the names of the dead and ineligible persons. The correction of current rolls by the Registration Officer, following the manner prescribed by Rule 21 of the Electoral Rolls Rules, 1982, for the purpose of publication as a draft inviting claims and objections, is not practically feasible, because the correction of current electoral rolls following the procedures as prescribed in the roles needs dependable and authentic document or record (death and birth register) that is not duly maintained by the Union Parishads, Paurashavas, City Corporations, and Cantonment Boards. This is one of the insurmountable problems in the process of revision.

The other problem is lack of interest among the claimants and objectors for filing claims and objections. A negligible percentage of the people take the trouble to file claims for inclusion of the names in the voters list and objection for exclusion of names of the ineligible persons therefrom. Experience shows that the numbers of claims and objections filed with the Registration Officers or the Revising Authority responding to the notice issued by the Registration Officer in each occasion were negligible. This indicates the indifference of the people towards preparation of the rolls. The reason is that the bulk of our population are illiterate and poor. They do not understand the importance of voting and have, therefore, little interest in filing claims and objections. They are more concerned and busy with the earning of their livelihood rather than establishing their voting rights.

Under the circumstances, it is too much to expect accuracy in the voter list through the process of revision. It is, therefore, wise to prepare the voter list afresh. If the fresh list is prepared with utmost care by the non-partisan and honest registration staff, the percentage of omissions and commissions shall definitely be within the acceptable limit. The quality of the rolls shall further improve if the commission involves the members of the non-partisan civil society organisations and creates favourable atmosphere for monitoring the registration process by them. In that event, maximum accuracy in the voter list can be ensured.

The question of revision of voter list was thoroughly examined more than thrice by the Election Commission constituted with the sitting or retired judges of the Supreme Court in the past. They considered the successful revision of rolls an impossible proposition. Because of that they prepared fresh roll in 1986, 1991, 1996, and 2001, and there was no protest whatsoever from any quarter.

The decision taken by the Chief Election Commissioner for the preparation of fresh rolls, though unilateral, has saved the nation from a serious crisis. He, therefore, deserves praise and encouragement from all quarters. The law does not prohibit the preparation of fresh rolls by the commission.

Burhanuddin Ahmed is the Executive Director of FEMA and a former Deputy Secretary of Election Commission.