Assam Voter List Purge: A Threat to Democracy and Citizenship Rights
Guwahati, Sep 5 (TTP): When Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma announced that individuals evicted from encroached government lands would have their names deleted from the voter rolls, it triggered widespread alarm. The move, positioned as a measure to protect Assam’s indigenous communities, comes close on the heels of large-scale voter deletions in Bihar under the Special Intensive Revision. Together, these developments raise troubling questions: Is voter disenfranchisement becoming a political tool in India?
Land, Citizenship, and the Right to Vote
At the heart of this policy lies a dangerous conflation — equating land ownership with citizenship rights.
India’s Constitution, under Article 326, guarantees universal adult suffrage, meaning every citizen above the age of 18 has the right to vote, regardless of land or property status.
The Election Commission of India (ECI) allows voter list deletions only under specific circumstances — death, change of residence, or disqualification. Eviction from government land, however, does not feature among these grounds.
Former Chief Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa put it succinctly: “Eviction or demolition cannot deprive an eligible person of his right to vote.” Sarma’s policy, therefore, appears to be legally dubious, bypassing the ECI’s authority and undermining constitutional guarantees.
A Communal Undertone
Sarma has justified his eviction-and-voter purge policy as a safeguard against “demographic invasion.” His repeated references to “land jihad” and “Bangladeshi-origin Muslims” frame this as a battle against a specific community — Bengali-speaking Muslims, many of whom have lived in Assam for generations.
Key developments:
- Since 2021, the Sarma government has cleared over 1,19,548 bighas (160 sq km) of land, displacing nearly 50,000 people, predominantly Muslims of Bengali origin.
- In Kachutali village, Kamrup district, over 1,000 residents evicted in September 2024 received notices threatening deletion from voter rolls on grounds of no longer being “ordinarily resident.”
These measures signal a pattern of selective enforcement, sparing indigenous groups while disproportionately impacting Muslims.
Democratic and Legal Concerns
The risks of this policy are manifold:
- Arbitrary disenfranchisement: Encroachment is an administrative or civil violation, not grounds for loss of voting rights. Even convicted criminals retain their right to vote unless legally disqualified.
- Erosion of ECI’s authority: By tying eviction to voting rights, the state government sidelines the Election Commission, which alone has constitutional jurisdiction over voter lists.
- Human rights impact: Disenfranchised citizens, often already marginalised, face statelessness, prolonged legal battles, and loss of political voice.
- Weaponisation of land disputes: The precedent could enable governments elsewhere to target vulnerable groups by linking land issues to voter eligibility.
The NRC Shadow
Assam’s politics remains haunted by the National Register of Citizens (NRC), which excluded over 19 lakh people in 2019, most of them Hindus. By linking eviction to disenfranchisement, the Sarma government risks reopening old wounds, undermining the already contentious NRC process.
For communities that have spent decades proving citizenship, this move casts further doubt on their legitimacy. It blurs the line between citizenship verification and political exclusion, creating a chilling effect.
Selective Protection and Discrimination
Sarma has been clear: groups like the Ahoms, Morans, Mottocks, Gorkhas, and Koch-Rajbongshis will be protected. Eviction and voter deletions will primarily affect those outside these categories.
This selective approach raises critical questions:
- Why are some communities granted protection while others face disenfranchisement?
- How can land disputes, often rooted in historical migration, be used as grounds to deny political rights?
Civil society groups argue that the policy institutionalises discrimination and risks deepening communal divides in one of India’s most sensitive states.
The Human Toll
For displaced families, the consequences extend beyond losing a home.
Take the case of Ibrahim Ali, a 33-year-old driver from Kachutali. His family not only lost their house but also now faces the prospect of losing their right to vote. Re-registering in a new constituency is fraught with bureaucratic hurdles, especially for marginalised groups frequently branded as “foreigners.”
For such communities, eviction is not just physical displacement — it becomes political erasure.
Bigger Implications for Indian Democracy
What happens in Assam will not remain confined to Assam. Linking eviction with disenfranchisement sets a precedent other states may follow, particularly where demographic anxieties run high.
If this becomes a political strategy, India risks sliding into a dangerous terrain where governments can strip voting rights through administrative actions, bypassing constitutional safeguards.
This undermines not only democratic participation but also India’s credibility as the world’s largest democracy.
Final Thoughts
Assam’s voter purge policy reveals a troubling shift: the weaponisation of administrative measures to achieve political outcomes. By equating eviction with voter disenfranchisement, Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma risks eroding constitutional protections and undermining democratic legitimacy.
The Election Commission of India must act decisively to ensure that voter list revisions remain within constitutional boundaries. Otherwise, Assam’s precedent could echo across India, leaving democracy itself vulnerable.
Voting is not a privilege tied to land ownership. It is a fundamental right of citizenship. To erode it under the guise of land protection is to set India on a perilous path where democracy bends to expediency.