The Supreme Court (SC) has recently raised critical questions regarding the Election Commission's (EC) authority to determine the citizenship of voters during the revision of electoral rolls, particularly in the context of Bihar's voter list update. This inquiry highlights a significant debate about the separation of powers and the fundamental right to vote in a democracy.

The core of the issue lies in whether the EC can decide who is a citizen, a power traditionally held by the Home Ministry. The SC acknowledged the EC's mandate to ensure that non-citizens are not included in the electoral rolls. However, the court emphasized that the actual determination of citizenship falls under the purview of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). This distinction is crucial because it clarifies that while the EC can identify and remove potential non-citizens from voter lists, it cannot unilaterally decide a person's citizenship status.

The Supreme Court's concern extends to the process and procedures followed by the EC during voter list revisions. The court stressed the importance of due process, ensuring that individuals are informed and given a fair opportunity to respond before their names are removed from the voter list. This prevents arbitrary or "surprise deletions" and safeguards voters from being unfairly disenfranchised. The SC has also stated that any inquiry conducted by electoral registration officers must be quasi-judicial, allowing affected persons to present evidence and have a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

Another point of contention is the use of Aadhaar cards and other documents as proof of citizenship. The EC's decision to exclude Aadhaar as a valid document for electoral roll revision has been questioned, with the SC asking why Aadhaar cannot be accepted as proof of citizenship. The EC has argued that Aadhaar is merely a proof of identity, while citizenship requires a different set of documents. The court, however, has indicated that multiple laws should be considered to fully understand the issue. Furthermore, concerns have been raised that the extensive documentation requirements imposed by the EC could disproportionately affect marginalized populations who may not possess all the necessary documents.

The timing of the electoral roll revision, particularly in relation to upcoming elections, has also come under scrutiny. The SC questioned whether the revision process was being rushed, potentially leading to errors and disenfranchisement. Opposition parties have alleged that the revision exercise is a "citizenship screening exercise" with political motives, particularly in the context of the upcoming Bihar elections. The EC, however, maintains that the revision is a routine exercise necessary for maintaining an accurate voter list.

In summary, the Supreme Court is grappling with the balance between the EC's duty to maintain accurate voter lists and the protection of individual rights. The key issues under consideration are the EC's authority to determine citizenship, the importance of due process in voter list revisions, the validity of documents for proving citizenship, and the timing of these revisions. The court's final decision will have significant implications for the conduct of elections and the democratic rights of citizens.