LDF slams SIR voter list revision, calls move undemocratic

Thiruvananthapuram: The LDF Convener T P Ramakrishnan has sharply criticised the Election Commission of India’s decision to implement the State-wide Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, calling it an extremely undemocratic move.

He said that the Election Commission, a constitutional body responsible for safeguarding citizens’ right to vote, has in recent times been engaging in actions that erode its own credibility. The Commission, he alleged, has been repeatedly taking measures that effectively deprive lakhs of voters of their franchise. Its current actions, he added, appear designed to serve the political interests of the Sangh Parivar.

T P Ramakrishnan said that strong public resistance must be raised against this attempt to subvert the electoral process.

Following Bihar, the Election Commission has now moved to implement the SIR process in ten states and two Union Territories, including Kerala. From Monday midnight, the voters’ lists in 12 locations were frozen. Training for officials will be held from Tuesday to November 3. From November 4 to December 4, booth-level officers will conduct door-to-door visits to collect data for the new electoral roll. The draft list will be published on December 9.

Complaints regarding the draft can be submitted from December 9, 2025, to January 8, 2026. Hearings and settlements of these complaints will take place between December 9 and January 31, and the final voters’ list will be published on February 7, 2026.

Despite Kerala’s request to postpone the SIR process in view of the forthcoming local body elections, the Election Commission refused. However, Maharashtra, which is also heading into local body elections, was excluded from the second phase of SIR.

Kerala, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, and Puducherry, all heading for assembly elections next year, were included in the SIR list, while BJP-ruled Assam was excluded. Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar justified Assam’s exemption by citing the “special provisions” applicable to the state under citizenship laws, a reasoning Ramakrishnan described as bizarre.