EC mandates regular talks with parties amid TMC row

In response to a range of allegations from the opposition, including tampering of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs), manipulation of voter IDs and modifying voter lists by adding or deleting names, the Election Commission of India (ECI) on Tuesday directed all Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs), District Electoral Officers (DEOs) and Returning Officers (ROs) to hold regular meetings with political parties and resolve issues within the statutory framework.

The poll body also instructed these officials to prepare issue-wise action reports to be filed by the CEOs by March 31, 2025. These directions were issued during the first day of the two-day conference of CEOs from all states, which is being attended by over 100 officials from across the country.

The ECI’s directive came at a time when the Trinamool Congress (TMC) raised concerns over duplicate voter ID numbers in West Bengal and Haryana. The TMC dismissed the ECI’s clarifications on the issue as a “cover-up,” claiming that the Election Commission had failed to address the concerns raised by party leaders, especially West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee.

TMC Rajya Sabha MP Saket Gokhale, in a series of posts on X (formerly Twitter), criticised the ECI's response, asserting that the poll panel’s clarifications on the duplicate voter IDs were misleading. Gokhale pointed out that the ECI’s response contradicted its own guidelines, particularly those mentioned in the ‘Handbook for Electoral Registration Officers.’

“Yesterday, the All India Trinamool Congress had given the Election Commission of India 24 hours to admit and accept their blunder on the duplicate voter ID fraud issue. Clearly, the ECI, which has been exposed, wants to brazen it out,” Gokhale said. “The 'clarification' given by the ECI (on Sunday) in response to CM Mamata Banerjee is actually a cover-up. They have admitted there's something wrong but are refusing to accept it.”

Gokhale also criticised the ECI for its assertion that duplicate voter ID numbers were issued due to the use of the same "alphanumeric series" by different states. He referred to the 'Handbook for Electoral Registration Officers,' which states that the Functional Unique Serial Numbers (FUSN) are distinct for each Assembly constituency. This, according to Gokhale, makes it impossible for two different constituencies, even in the same state, to have the same voter ID numbers.

“EPIC card numbers are an alphanumeric sequence of three letters and seven digits. The ECI handbook clearly states that the three letters, known as a Functional Unique Serial Number (FUSN), are different for every Assembly constituency,” Gokhale explained. “Therefore, it is impossible for voters in two different assembly constituencies (even in the same state) to have the same first 3 letters on their EPIC.”

He further questioned the integrity of the election process, pointing out that if the same EPIC number was assigned to voters in different states, it could lead to a photo mismatch during voting, thereby potentially denying those voters the right to cast their ballots. “In photo electoral rolls, the elector is linked to his photo by the EPIC number. Therefore, when a voter in Bengal goes to cast their vote, their photo on the electoral roll will be different if the same EPIC number has been allotted to a person in another state,” Gokhale continued. “This will lead to the refusal of voting due to a photo mismatch. By allotting the same EPIC numbers in different states, voting can be denied to those who are likely to vote for non-BJP parties due to photo mismatch.”

The Election Commission's clarifications earlier had stated that even though two people could share the same EPIC number, they would only be able to vote in their respective constituencies where they were enrolled. However, the TMC remained unsatisfied with this explanation and continued to press for more clarity on the matter.

The ongoing conference of CEOs also marked the first major event under the leadership of Gyanesh Kumar, the newly-appointed Chief Election Commissioner (CEC). During his address, CEC Kumar emphasised the need for transparency and urged all election officials to adhere to the legal framework governing elections, including the Representation of the People Act of 1950 and 1951, the Registration of Electors Rules 1960 and the Conduct of Election Rules 1961.

Kumar directed officials to be responsive to the concerns of political parties and reiterated that meetings between political parties and election officials should be held regularly to resolve issues within the existing statutory framework. “All party meetings at all statutory levels should be held regularly to resolve any issues within the existing statutory framework by the concerned competent authority, i.e., ERO or DEO or CEO,” he said.