EC vs. Mamata: Poll body accuses West Bengal CM of fuelling hostility in voter list dispute

A Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal has led to a constitutional dispute, with the Election Commission of India (ECI) accusing West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee of interfering and creating a hostile environment for poll officials. In a strongly worded affidavit to the Supreme Court, the Commission highlighted violence and intimidation, attributing it to the chief minister’s public remarks.

At the centre of the dispute is the SIR exercise, a detailed revision of voter list, meant to remove duplicate entries, correct errors, and ensure eligible voters are enrolled. In West Bengal, the exercise has become a point of contention between the state government led by the Trinamool Congress and constitutional authorities.

What the Election Commission has alleged

In its affidavit to the Supreme Court, the ECI claimed that the SIR process in West Bengal has been marked by violence and a threatening atmosphere for election staff deployed for roll verification. The Commission’s submission suggests electoral work is being obstructed by an alleged campaign of misinformation that has made the state hostile for officials.

A key element of the affidavit is the direct naming of Mamata Banerjee. The ECI accuses the chief minister of delivering provocative speeches and spreading misleading claims about the SIR, creating public suspicion against the exercise.

The EC also alleges fear-mongering by the chief minister, implying deliberate incitement of panic among voters. In the Commission’s assessment, such messaging has fueled tensions, translating into threats and obstruction faced by poll officials during fieldwork. The affidavit claims that micro-observers, election personnel assigned to monitoring, have been singled out by Mamata Banerjee in public comments, potentially exposing them to pressure and intimidation.

Mamata government’s counter-charge

The West Bengal government’s response has been sharp, anchored in a different concern: disenfranchisement.

For Mamata Banerjee and the Trinamool Congress, the SIR is not a neutral administrative correction exercise. They have projected it as a politically charged operation targeting genuine voters, particularly among the poor, migrants, minorities, and other vulnerable communities who may not have perfect documentation or stable addresses.

The state’s claim is that electoral roll verification drives, if implemented aggressively, can result in deletions that strip citizens of their voting rights. In this framing, the ECI’s emphasis on purification of the voter list becomes a potential instrument of exclusion.

Why Supreme Court’s role is now pivotal

The Supreme Court’s intervention underscores that the dispute has become a question of constitutional balance: how to protect the Election Commission’s autonomy and ensure safe working conditions for its officials, while also preventing genuine voters from being wrongly deleted.

The Court’s scrutiny will likely focus on two points: First, whether the ECI’s process is transparent and fair, with safeguards against wrongful deletion. Second, whether the state government has crossed the line from criticism into obstruction.