On the second morning of Parliament’s Winter Session, Opposition MPs, clutching banners that screamed “End SIR, Stop Vote Chori”, marched into the complex in a tableau that has become increasingly familiar in recent years. Their demand was urgent: an immediate debate on the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, a sweeping verification drive underway across 12 states and Union Territories, one the Opposition claims threatens the integrity of India’s democracy. As they underlined the recently held Bihar assembly election where SIR paved the way for the ruling party’s success.
Choking under the thick veil of Delhi’s worsening air quality, Opposition MPs staged a protest march inside the Parliament complex courtyard. Many described the toxic smog as symbolic of the political opacity they accuse the government of nurturing – on electoral rolls, on citizen data, and on the dismantling of institutional safeguards.
Inside both Houses, those placards became the day’s battlelines. And as the Treasury benches dodged, deflected and delayed, the Winter Session’s opening week dissolved into a now-familiar theatre of adjournments, walkouts, accusations, and an ever-deepening trust deficit.
A Debate Promised,Not Yet Delivered
After stonewalling during the entire monsoon session, the government appeared to relent, at least rhetorically. On December 2, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju announced that a debate on electoral reforms, including the controversial SIR, would be held the following week.
Yet the concession came with a caveat. The discussion would only take place after a commemorative session marking 150 years of VandeMataram. To the Opposition, this sequencing was not innocuous; it was yet another procedural sleight of hand, a way to delay and dilute the one issue they say demands urgent scrutiny.
“We are ready to discuss SIR today. People are dying,” Mallikarjun Kharge said passionately in Rajya Sabha, referencing the BLOs collapsingunder the crushing deadlines of door-to-door verification. “This is not an administrative formality. This is about democracy.”
Rijiju responded in measured tones, but the effect was anything but calming:“SIR is an administrative decision of the Election Commission. The government cannot comment.”
The technicality landed like a provocation. By the end of the second day, both Houses had been adjourned repeatedly. A GST amendment related to Manipur was squeezed through during the turmoil, but the central issue, the SIR, remained stuck in procedural freeze.
The SIR That Sparked a Firestorm
Ordinarily, revising electoral rolls is a dry, bureaucratic exercise – quiet, methodical, and largely invisible. But this year’s SIR has triggered a political earthquake.
The CPI(M)called the SIR “chaotic and arbitrary,” accusing the ECI of unleashing an exercise plagued by impossible deadlines, poor planning, and dangerous working conditions. What should have been a transparent and citizen-friendly update, they said, had mutated into a bureaucratic race marked by errors, exclusions, and a chilling number of fatalities.
The allegations are stark: BLOs being forced to conduct verification work in political party offices, a blatant violation of neutrality. Households receiving multiple verification visits within days. Citizens confused, anxious, or unaware that the wrong response, or lack of one, could result in their deletion from the rolls. Reports of BLOs collapsing under stress surfaced from several states. The CPI(M) bluntly described these deaths as “not accidental casualties but a direct outcome of an irresponsible administrative process.”
Tamil Nadu Congress MP Vijay Vasanth went a step further, moving an adjournment motion in the Lok Sabha to demand immediate suspension of the SIR. Calling the exercise “unplanned, opaque and one-sided,” he accused the ECI of “institutional cruelty” for its silence on BLO deaths.
“The entire SIR has become an anti-people, anti-democratic exercise,” he argued, warning that hurried deletions and data inconsistencies were already generating widespread distress. Vasanth demanded proper timelines, safety protocols, and compensation for the families of deceased BLOsalong with a parliamentary summons for ECIto explain the rationale and fallout of the accelerated revision.
Across parties – Congress, CPI(M), DMK, TMC, NCP, IUML – the Opposition’s growing fear is identical: that the SIR’s speed and opacity could open the door to mass disenfranchisement. And behind that fear lies a deeper, more explosive allegationthat electoral rolls could be tweaked to benefit the ruling BJP ahead of critical state and national elections.
Democracy, Distrust and Delay
Despite the government’s repeated assurances of “openness” to a debate, the Opposition remains unconvinced. The monsoon session, after all, collapsed almost entirely due to the government’s refusal to set a date for the discussion. That memory hangs over the Winter Session like a cloud.
“Trust deficit,” Trinamool Congress MP Derek O’Brien declared bluntly. “We accepted the government’s proposal in the spirit of democracy. Now we will corner them in both debates.”
Yet the government insists the Opposition is being inflexible.“You can put forward your demand,” Rijiju countered, “but you cannot reject other demands. The matter has not been rejected.”
Rajya Sabha Chairman C.P. Radhakrishnan attempted to mediate the rising tensions with a familiar refrain: “Wait for the government to come back with a time.”
But Parliament today operates in a peculiar limbo – technically functioning, yet practically paralysed.
The Sanchar Sathi Shockwave
Into this already combustible atmosphere came another accusation: that the government was using the Sanchar Sathi mobile application to intrude into citizens’ private lives.Opposition parties described the app as the government’s latest attempt at mass surveillance.
“What Pegasus was for VIPs, Sanchar Sathi is for common Indians,” one MP said, alleging that the app could allow access to conversations, photographs, and data.
Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera sharpened the charge, claiming the app reflected Prime Minister Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah’s “long-standing habit of snooping,” which he said stretched back to their Gujarat years.
While the government dismissed these claims as conspiracy, the Opposition’s critique dovetailed into their broader narrativethat democratic institutions, from the Election Commission to data protection mechanisms, are being systematically compromised.
A Media Lens, Tilted and Fogged
While Parliament witnessed protests and procedural wars, an equally revealing drama played out outside its walls.
Prime Minister Modi, opening the session, delivered a pointed jab at the Opposition, saying they should “stop lamenting electoral losses.” Within minutes, major news channels headlined his remark – verbatim, unfiltered, and without context. In contrast, the SIR controversy struggled to find prominent placement in prime-time bulletins.
Meanwhile, Congress MP Renuka Chowdhury faced breathless television scrutiny – not for a policy position, but for rescuing a stray puppy en route to Parliament. The puppy never entered the building, but the headlines did.The juxtaposition was jarring. As BLOs collapsed under pressure, as voter roll controversies multiplied, and as Parliament stalled over a matter affecting millions of citizens, much of the media focused on optics rather than substance.
Commentators and media scholars warned that this trendof amplifying trivialities while sidestepping critical institutional issuesmirrors a deeper distortion. Maya Mirchandani writes that today’s “uncritical, adoring press” inadvertently weakens the Opposition and, by extension, democratic accountability.
A decade ago, the media led crusades against the UPA government over corruption scandals – from 2G to Coalgate to Commonwealth Games irregularities. The relentless pressure helped fuel mass movements like the Lokpal agitation. Today, similar fervour is rare, replaced by a media environment where difficult questions are often eclipsed by noise, sensationalism, or deference.
The irony is not lost on those who recall the past:A weak opposition and a weak media often go hand in hand. And neither is good for democracy.
Who Gets Counted, and Who Doesn’t
Beyond the parliamentary drama and media spectacle lies the beating heart of the crisis: India’s voters.The SIR is not a policy debate happening in the abstract. Its outcomes could determine who remains on the voter rollsand who vanishes from them. Every mistakenly deleted name, every unverified household, every overworked BLO, and every confused citizen adds to the stakes.
Allegations from Bihar of sudden increases in voter numbers, uneven verifications, and lack of diligence during SIR have only deepened suspicions. Civil society organisations warn that marginalised groups – migrant workers, minority communities, senior citizens – are most at risk.
The government maintains that electoral rolls fall squarely under the Election Commission’s purview. But the Opposition argues that Parliament cannot remain a silent spectator when the legitimacy of India’s electoral system itself is at stake.
A Winter of Questions
As the first week of the Winter Session drew to a close, clarity remained elusive. A debate on electoral reforms may materialise next week. Or it may not. The government may address concerns about SIR. Or it may continue to rely on ECI’s administrative autonomy as a defence. The media may amplify these debates. Or it may remain distracted.
For the Opposition, for civil society groups, and for millions of Indians anxious about their names on the voter list, each passing day feels heavier than the last.
The Winter Session continues – clouded by dissent, chilled by distrust, and carried forward by the stubborn insistence that every citizen’s vote must count, and every question raised in Parliament must be answered.Whether India’s democratic institutions can rise to the moment, or whether they will remain stuck in the fog of political expediency, remains the defining question of this winter of discontent.