In a matter of a few hours and amidst much furore, the Election Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2021 was passed in the recently concluded Winter Session of Parliament. Amongst the electoral reforms the legislation proposes to bring about is the linking of Aadhaar with electoral data. While the government says this is an essential exercise that will help cleanse the electoral rolls of duplicate entries, concerns have been expressed by opposition parties and election watchers about the potential of the move to impact privacy of voters and even disenfranchise them.
What the legislation proposes
The aim is to allow electoral registration officers to seek the Aadhaar number of people who want to register as voters for the purpose of establishing the identity. It also seeks to allow electoral registration officers to ask for Aadhaar numbers from persons already included in the electoral roll for the purposes of authentication of entries in the electoral roll, and to identify registration of the name of the same person in the electoral roll of more than one constituency or more than once in the same constituency.
As per the bill, no application for inclusion of name in the electoral roll shall be denied and no entries in the electoral roll shall be deleted for the inability of an individual to furnish or intimate Aadhaar number due to such sufficient cause as may be prescribed. People who cannot provide Aadhaar details will be allowed to furnish other alternative documents as may be prescribed, as per the legislation.
The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the bill states that Section 23 of the Representation of People Act, 1950 is being amended to allow linking of electoral roll data with the Aadhaar ecosystem to curb the menace of multiple enrolments of the same person in different places.
A brief history of the move to link Aadhaar with electoral data
The Election Commission had, in March 2015, launched the National Electoral Roll Purification and Authentication Programme to link voter ID with Aadhaar. The aim of the programme was to have a totally error free and authenticated electoral roll. However, it was put on hold in August 2015 when the Supreme Court passed an interim order that limited the use of Aadhaar only for the purpose of government's distribution of foodgrains and cooking fuel.
The electoral reforms proposed by the Election Commission in recent years has had amongst the top-most priorities the need to link the electoral roll with the Aadhaar ecosystem with a view to curbing the menace of multiple enrolment of the same person at different places. The commission feels that this would help in purification of the electoral rool as well as allow for the possibility of remote voting. The poll panel has stated that Aadhaar numbers will not be put in the public domain.
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice in its 101st report has also endorsed the view that linking voter ID with Aadhaar will help in cleaning up electoral data.
Concerns expressed by opposition parties and experts
The biggest concern expressed about the legislation is that it can lead to dienfranchisement of voters, with Aadhaar becoming mandatory in practice when the move is implemented, despite the government's assurance to the contrary.
The amendment provides that the electoral registration officer may, for the purpose of establishing the identity of any person, require that such person may furnish the Aadhaar number as per the provisions of the Aadhaar Act, 2016. It is argued by those opposed to the legislation that the 'may' in the provision can easily turn into 'must' in effect.
It is felt that while the legislation states that it will be voluntary for a voter to furnish Aadhaar details, it could for all practical purposes end up becoming mandatory.
The legislation states that no application for inclusion of name in the electoral roll shall be denied and no entries in the electoral roll shall be deleted for inability of an individual to furnish or intimate Aadhaar number. But it is argued that the remaining part of the clause--“due to such sufficient cause as may be prescribed: Provided that such individual may be allowed to furnish such other alternate documents as may be prescribed"--is problematic, as the rules that are prescribed by the government to implement it could result in applications getting rejected.
Those opposed to the legislation also claim that it violates the individual's right to privacy and can also have an impact on the sanctity of the election process.
