VENAN BONAVENTURE DIAS
A peaceful Sunday after a tedious week was disrupted by the BLO’s third and final visit, whose lack of preparation only added to the already complicated issue of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR). The officer had earlier arrived at my residence without any knowledge of the process and openly admitted he had been pushed into the task. I was left to guide him and even draft the required details, relying on guidelines published in newspapers.
The matter escalated when the BLO, under instructions from the Mamlatdar, insisted on collecting data dating back to 2002. As a resident of Santo Estevam, my records and those of my parents were already available online. However, complications arose regarding my spouse, originally from Mangalore, who had no SIR data and no voter ID prior to our marriage in 2005, as she was then an NRI. Despite being informed that she and her parents resided in the UAE before our marriage, the BLO maintained that her data from Mangalore was required.
The situation worsened when, again citing the Mamlatdar’s directions, the BLO declared that we would be served a notice and required to depose before the Mamlatdar to provide information. The use of the term “notice” was deeply objectionable, as it is typically reserved for individuals against whom an action is intended. Why should a citizen who has been voting in Goa for over two decades be subjected to such scrutiny? Voters deserve respect, not intimidation—we are honourable citizens exercising our democratic rights.
The Goa CEO admitted on a news channel that no foolproof system exists to prevent Voter ID misuse. Unlike Aadhaar–PAN–DL linkages, Voter ID remains excluded, enabling multiple voting across states. Aadhaar, used widely for transactions, could easily be linked to Voter ID. Chief Justice Surya Kant (Supreme Court, Nov 27, 2025) affirmed foreigners with Aadhaar cannot vote, point accepted.
My suggestions for this situation would be:
• Mandatory colour‑coding of Aadhaar for foreigners or foreign migrant labourers, would restrict it to general identification or welfare.
• For legal Indian voters, linking Voter ID with Aadhaar will ensure one vote per citizen.
It’s alarming that the Election Commission has failed to conduct an SIR between 2002 and 2025, and is now relying on data that is outdated and potentially duplicated across States. To understand this better, just see how it is misused by migrant community, a labourer from a different State has a valid data about his parents, comes down to Goa and states that he wants to vote in Goa, and due to the different dates of elections in both States, votes in his home state and registers with his valid SIR in Goa and votes here as well. Is this right constitutionally?
Solution: Only way to prevent this is to have a uniform election date across India, this will definitely prevent duplication and multiple registrations.
Can SIR records from 2002 truly ensure that individuals do not hold multiple voter IDs in different states? Depending on data that is 23 years old raises serious questions, especially when the State government issues residence certificates only for a 15-year period, valid for just three years regardless of residence beyond 15 years. How then can 23-year-old records be considered reliable for the Commission’s findings? The only practical solution is to link Aadhaar with Voter ID, restricted to genuine Indian citizens.
Amidst unfolding events in Goa, the Election Commission, according to the CEO, appears unaware of how many Portuguese citizens are casting votes, or how many of those have contested and won panchayat elections, are now serving as panch members without notable contributions-some even as senior citizens drawing dual benefits, pensions from foreign countries alongside salaries in India. This exposes the mockery of a process fundamentally flawed. Thorough investigation is warranted against BLOs, Mamlatdars and other authorities who failed to detect irregularities, merely following instructions without verifying authenticity. On one hand, the government attempts to regularise illegal houses under Mhaje Ghar, while on the other, it seeks excuses to delete names of eligible voters who exercised their franchise in Goa for over two decades without duplicating data elsewhere. This entire exercise stinks of rewarding violators while penalising those upholding the law.
The Election Commission of India has announced its intention to proceed with the linkage of the Voters ID and Aadhaar, citing its authority under Sections 23(4), 23(5), and 23(6) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. This move is presented as being consistent with the spirit of Article 326 of the Constitution, which guarantees universal adult suffrage, and in alignment with the Supreme Court’s observations in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 177 of 2023.
However, a critical ambiguity remains unresolved: while the Commission has spoken of implementing Aadhaar linkage, it has not clarified how the voluntary nature of this exercise—explicitly upheld by the Supreme Court—will be reconciled with any attempt to make it mandatory. The Apex Court has categorically held that linking Aadhaar with voter ID must remain optional, raising serious concerns that compulsory linkage would compromise the secrecy of the ballot.
Solution: The apprehension is that digital trails created through Aadhaar-based authentication may allow voter identities to be traced back to individual ballots, thereby undermining the foundational principle of electoral confidentiality.
In light of these concerns, the most prudent course of action would be to retain digital identity systems for administrative convenience, while reverting to paper ballots for the actual act of voting. Such a hybrid approach would preserve the secrecy of the vote while still enabling modernisation of voter databases.
Before embarking on the costly and cumbersome exercise of the SIR—a process that has already imposed significant burdens on genuine voters, the Commission ought to have prioritised Aadhaar-voter ID linkage. A carefully designed and legislatively mandated-linkage, introduced through a bill in Parliament, could have provided a secure mechanism for cross-verification, reduced duplication, and strengthened digitisation efforts. Executing on a war footing, such a measure will ensure both efficiency and integrity in the electoral process, avoiding unnecessary expenditure and voter inconvenience.
(The writer is an educational and social entrepreneur vocal on issues related to governance, poverty, education, healthcare, and environmental conservation)
