Back in the SSR,but why did it go?

Election Commission's decision to resume Special Summary Revision (SSR) of electoral rolls is most welcome, coming as it does after protests, allegations of irregularities and reported disconnect within EC. Resuming a routine exercise that allows young and first-time voters to register, and gives those left out of the rolls another opportunity to enrol, is a necessary corrective. But let's not depend on mass public grievance each time to fix or maintain aspects of such an essential democratic process.

SSR is an annual exercise, distinct from SIR, which involves verification of existing entries. The last SSR was conducted in August 2024, with the final electoral roll published in January 2025. SIR, meanwhile, has upended the established process, with large-scale deletions and allegations of faulty procedures. Prolonged absence of SSR compounded these anxieties. For citizens turning 18, delayed revision can mean missing the EVM button. For those whose names have been deleted, it means navigating yet another administrative process to reclaim their place on the rolls.

EC shouldn't let resumption close the matter. It must explain why SSR was stalled for nearly 2 yrs, despite being a regular feature. Was the delay necessitated by administrative constraints, decision to prioritise SIR, or something else? A constitutional body entrusted with safeguarding the right to vote must be accountable for decisions that affect access to that right. Electoral administration can't depend on individual discretion. EC must clarify the institutional reasoning behind the delay and put safeguards to ensure that routine, inclusion-oriented processes are not suspended without explanation. Restoring SSR is welcome. Explaining its suspension is vital.