Sat Sep 13 16:10:33 UTC 2025: **Summary of Text**
This article from The Hindu reports on a speech given by former Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa concerning the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) recent actions during a special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, particularly in Bihar. Lavasa criticizes the ECI for shifting the burden of proving citizenship onto voters, a move he considers unprecedented and potentially damaging to public trust. He highlights the categorization of voters based on enrollment date, requiring additional documentation from those enrolled after 2003. Lavasa questions the legality and fairness of excluding individuals who have been on the rolls for decades simply because they fail to return a signed form. He notes the large number of names removed without proper notice and emphasizes the Supreme Court’s intervention regarding Aadhaar as proof. He argued that the process lacked independent verification and has resulted in mass exclusions. Lavasa warns that by attempting to determine citizenship, the ECI is entering dangerous territory.
**News Article**
**Election Commission Risks Public Trust with Citizenship Verification Tactics, Warns Former Commissioner**
**HYDERABAD, September 13, 2025** – The Election Commission of India (ECI) is facing criticism for its recent methods of voter roll revision, with former Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa warning of potential damage to public trust. Speaking at the Ajay Gandhi Memorial Lecture in Hyderabad on Saturday, Lavasa condemned the ECI’s actions in Bihar, where voters enrolled after 2003 are being required to provide additional documentation to prove their citizenship.
Lavasa described the Bihar exercise as “unprecedented” in the ECI’s history, highlighting that the burden of proving citizenship has been shifted onto voters. The ECI divided voters into sub-categories based on date of birth and enrollment date. Lavasa questions the fairness of excluding long-standing voters who fail to return a signed form.
“By venturing into the determination of citizenship, the Commission has entered very slippery territory,” Lavasa stated, questioning the legality and fairness of the process. He also criticized the term “purify” and the fact that 65 lakh names were obliterated without serving individual notices, as required under law, under the pretext of creating a fresh roll
He highlighted concerns regarding the exclusion of a significant number of voters without proper notification and pointed out that the Supreme Court had to intervene to permit Aadhaar as proof. He also stated that the methodology, unlike earlier field surveys, where enumerators verified household details directly, the present approach lacked independent verification, and yet resulted in mass exclusions under the categories of ‘dead’, ‘migrated’, or ‘duplicate’, he said.
The ECI has yet to respond to Lavasa’s comments. This development raises important questions about the fairness and inclusivity of India’s electoral process, particularly in light of ongoing debates surrounding citizenship verification.
First Piper 