How can EC decide citizenship issues of voters? SC asks EC

NEW DELHI: With opposition parties alleging SIR of electoral rolls of Bihar was a "citizenship screening exercise" and EC refuting the allegation and contending that being a citizen was the primary criterion for being a voter, Supreme Court Thursday asked whether the poll panel could venture into the citizenship issue which comes within the jurisdiction of home ministry .

When senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, for EC, justified the poll panel's decision to exclude Aadhaar as a valid document for the electoral roll revision, saying Aadhaar could not be accepted as proof of citizenship, a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi replied, "But citizenship is an issue to be determined not by the EC, but by the home ministry."

SC said there was nothing wrong in EC purging electoral rolls through an intensive exercise in order to see that non-citizens don't remain on the rolls. Senior advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for Congress and other opposition parties, said EC was undertaking a citizenship screening exercise. He said voters in the list were presumed to be citizens of the country and that presumption could not be taken away by the EC.

Echoing him, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, for RJD neta Manoj Jha, said there was a procedure under Citizenship Act which had to be followed in deciding citizenship disputes and a person who participated in more than 10 elections since 2003 could not be doubted not to be a citizen without any proof to the contrary.

They said the SC ruling and guidelines framed in 1995 in Lal Babu Hussein case were not being followed by EC. They said SC had held that a person whose name was there on the roll and was intended to be removed must be informed why a suspicion had arisen with regard to his status as a citizen so that he may be able to show that the basis for the suspicion was ill-founded.

"The officer holding the enquiry shall bear in mind that the enquiry being quasi-judicial in nature, he must entertain all such evidence, documentary or otherwise, the concerned affected person may like to tender in evidence and disclose all such material on which he proposes to place reliance, so that the concerned person has had a reasonable opportunity of rebutting such evidence. The concerned person, it must always be remembered, must have a reasonable opportunity of being heard," SC had said on electoral registration officers holding inquiry on citizenship issues .