Was there selective cleansing of Bangalore electoral roles?

That's in effect what Justice M F Saldanha (Retd), Chairman – Karnataka Chapter, Trnasparency International India, is alleging. His letter to the Chief Election Commissioner, Karnataka, is reproduced below:

The 1st phase of voting was undertaken in Bangalore City on 23 April 2009. This year the consciousness levels were abnormally high and both individuals and organizations over the last six months had taken the trouble to ensure that every singly eligible voter was duly represented in the electoral rolls. In my own case I  personally ensured that all the requisite procedures were complied with and completed within the prescribed time. Despite this when we reached the Polling Booth No. 5 yesterday the name of Domingo’s Region Fernandes was missing from the electoral roll. This man is permanently resident at my flat as he works for me and has voted at all the earlier elections.

Since 7.30 a.m. yesterday I received over 100 calls from citizens all over the city complaining that their names have been selectively  deleted  from the electoral rolls. Every single one of them stated that they have complied with all the formalities and it is their charge that the names have been deliberately removed at the stage of the final printing.  

I spent about four hours at the polling booth Nos.4,5 & 6 and I desire to record something serious that has taken place at this centre:

a) It is not correct to state that the voter turnout in the city was poor. I have seen several elections and between 10 a.m. & 2 p.m. there was a heavy continuous stream of persons arriving to cast their votes. This was the case all through the day.  Unfortunately as many as 2 to 3 out of every five persons found their names missing. The situation was unpleasant because all of them insisted that they had complied with all the requirements and they alleged that because they belonged to the minority community or to sections of society who would not be supporting the BJP that their names have been removed. There is considerable substance in this charge because the absence of  names follows the very pattern that is being complained about. For instance, in a family group just one or two names are present and all the remaining members of the household have been deleted. In other instances wholesale deletion has taken place principally because the names are easily identifiable such as persons belonging to the Christian and Muslim community. The reason why I spent considerable time doing an on the spot analysis was because I wanted to check the facts very carefully and I find that the charge is fully substantiated.

b) There was a lot of movement around this centre because the candidates and their representatives were continuously moving between the various polling centers in Bangalore and all of them told me that the aforesaid pattern was common at all the polling centers in Bangalore City.

c) On the basis of actual figures available the voter turn out in Bangalore City was close to 100% but the report put out is that the voting was around 40%. This is because only 40% of the persons who came to vote were allowed to vote. What follows from this is extremely serious because the result that emerges will not be representative of the will of the people as over 50% of the citizens were prevented from voting.

d) THE IRRESISTABLE CONCLUSION IS THAT MORE NUMBER OF VOTERS HAVE BEEN DENIED THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS TO CAST THEIR VOTES THAN THE NUMBER WHO HAVE ACTUALLY VOTED BECAUSE OF A DEVIOUS AND CORRUPT PRACTICE THAT HAS  MANIFESTED ITSELF WHILE PRINTING THE FINAL LIST. ONE OF THE LADIES PRESENT IS WILLING TO GIVE EVIDENCE THAT SHE HAD CHECKED THE FINAL LIST, FOUND HER NAME THERE AND THAT IT HAS STILL BEEN DELETED FROM THE LIST AVAILABLE AT THE POLLING BOOTH. THERE WERE SUSPICIONS AND ALLEGATIONS THAT THE GOVERNMENT WHICH IS IN CHARGE OF THE PRINTING IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE SUCCESS OF ITS OWN CANDIDATES. THE FACTS FULLY ESTABLISH THIS CHARGE.

The irresistible conclusion is that the electoral process is vitiated abs initio by a corrupt practice amounting to FRAUD and on this ground alone the Election  Commission will have to order an enquiry and a re-poll. As a first step an immediate public notice will have to be issued in the media very prominently calling upon all those citizens whose names have been illegally deleted to bring it to the notice of the Election Commission in a duly prescribed manner and within a specified time. It is not necessary that  the number of persons complaining should be higher than or close to those who have voted because there are instances when the contest is close and even a few votes could tilt the balance. If it is found on  enquiry that a corrupt practice has occurred a re-election will have to be ordered at all the centers where the voting took place on 23 April 2009. It follows that the results of the vitiated election cannot be declared.

Please take immediate steps to proceed along the lines as set out above. If the Commission refuses to do so an order to that effect may be passed so that the aggrieved parties can move for legal redress. This may be treated as a formal demand for justice .

Yours faithfully, etc

Muralidhar Rao