The SC in its May 23 judgment referred to the provisions of the electoral laws for revising the voter list by visiting door to door, but the Election Commission (EC) has repeatedly claimed that the court did not give any directive in this regard.

According to the SC observation, the electoral rolls must be revised following the prescribed procedure in the Electoral Rolls Ordinance, 1982 and the Electoral Rolls Rules, 1982 that the enumerators will visit door to door to collect information about prospective voters. The supervisors will verify the information thus collected and then the registration officers will check at least 10 per cent information before publishing a draft voter list inviting claims and objections.

The final voter list will be published at the end of this procedure, said legal experts.

However, the EC decided on June 12 that its officials will not visit door to door and asked people to register their names with the election offices at the district and upazila headquarters. It also decided to publish a supplementary voter list, rather than a draft, containing the names of the new voters.

Sticking to the EC position, Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) MA Aziz claimed on Monday again that the EC is acting "in accordance with" the court's order. "We will act in accordance with the court's verdict and directives...but it is not possible to visit door to door following the court's directives," Aziz told journalists.

Legal experts and former election commissioners have alleged that the CEC is misinterpreting the court's verdict and the electoral rolls ordinance and rules.

"[The CEC] is giving wrong interpretation of the court's verdict to justify his earlier unconstitutional activities as he has wasted the fund in connection with preparation of the voter list and there is no fund for the task now," Justice Ghulam Rabbani, former judge of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, told The Daily Star yesterday.

"Under this circumstances created by his own foolishness, he is trying to give his own interpretation of the court's verdict," he said.

Echoing the view, former election commissioner Justice Naimuddin Ahmed said, "The subtle spirit of the judgment is to revise the existing voter list following the appropriate procedure prescribed in the laws. But the Election Commission is not doing it."

He said, "[The SC] observation is the guidelines for the Election Commission. It must follow the observation...to revise the existing electoral rolls in accordance with the procedure that makes door to door visit mandatory."

Former election commissioner AK Mohammad Ali told The Daily Star yesterday, "There is no ambiguity in the court's verdict that clearly referred to the related laws for revising the existing voter list by visiting door to door. There will be no controversy if the Election Commission follows the court's verdict in preparing the voter list."

Justice Rabbani said there is even no necessity to wait for the court's directives for preparing the voter list. "It is the constitutional duty of the Election Commission to do the job. It is an audacious attitude to wait for any court's directives for preparing the electoral rolls," he said.

On June 12, the EC decided to follow one of the High Court's January 4 directives, modified by the SC, regarding deletion of the names from the existing voter list. The SC in its modification referred to the legal procedure for deleting the names in accordance with the Electoral Rolls Rules, 1982.

The EC also adopted another sub-rule of the Electoral Rolls Rules, 1982 for inclusion of names in the voter list. The sub-rule, however, was not referred to in the SC modification.

Justice Naimuddin said the procedure the EC has initiated is applicable only after completing the revision of the voter list.

Mohammad Ali also echoed him. "The Election Commission is wasting time by taking up the wrong procedure, which is applicable after making revision of the voter list," he said.