Top News

369

NEW DELHI: Rahul Gandhi and his Congress party are opposing the Modi government’s move to identify citizenship and prepare the voter list accordingly, but why is it not being reminded to them and to the public that when Rahul Baba’s government was in power in 2008-2009, the citizenship identification project had already been initiated by Mr. Chidambaram?

As Home Minister, Chidambaram had approved crores of rupees in budget for this purpose, in order to stop the infiltration of illegal Bangladeshis and strengthen India’s security. He had even begun collecting forms and preparing lists for citizenship smart cards in several states.

Lakhs of people across the country, including journalists like me, went to the designated government centres, got their photographs taken and completed the necessary biometric formalities. But a few months later, it emerged that the Gandhi family and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh under some unknown pressure hard stopped this entire project. It was then said that the Aadhaar scheme would be given priority instead. Not only this, allegations of major corruption surfaced in the contracts awarded to private companies for producing crores of smart cards.

This is why the question now arises: When Rahul and the Congress government carry out citizenship identification, it is considered a virtue but when Modi’s government does the same, why is it labelled a sin?

Topics like “identity,” “citizenship,” and “voter verification” have always been sensitive in Indian politics. But over the past decade and a half, the ideological and political shifts within the Congress on these matters have been highly controversial. There was a time when the Congress government’s Home Minister P. Chidambaram was himself the architect of the stringent identity project known as the National Population Register (NPR).

The period from 2008 to 2012 was challenging for India’s internal security: the 26/11 attacks, illegal Bangladeshi infiltration in the Northeast and border regions, and organised crime networks using fake documents. Against this backdrop, as Home Minister, Chidambaram had said that India needed a strong citizenship identification system—one that recorded not just residence but citizenship. With this thinking, the proposal for the National Population Register received cabinet approval along with the budget. The government at that time believed that house to house verification, distinguishing residents from potential citizens, a national database for security agencies, and a basic framework for identifying illegal migrants were essential. Congress’s argument then was: “National security and citizen identification require administrative courage, not political hesitation”.

During 2009-10, the NPR and smart-card project received an initial budget of more than Rs 3,700 crore, later revised to around Rs 6,000 crore. This was to be spent on survey personnel, biometric devices, smart-card production, central server infrastructure, and grants to state governments.

Then Aadhaar emerged and the clash between two identification systems began. In 2009, the government simultaneously established the UIDAI and launched the Aadhaar project. Under Chidambaram, the NPR was seen as a security focused project, not merely a census exercise. The idea was that without verified identity, fighting terrorism and crime was difficult; illegal migrants affected both voter lists and ration system. Congress had claimed then that NPR was not directed against any community, it was an administrative purification that would benefit genuine citizens and expose fake identities.

At the same time, the Congress government pushed Aadhaar forward through the Planning Commission. This created an internal conflict in policy, and ultimately Chidambaram’s NPR plan was halted. The NPR was only partially implemented in a few states. Smart cards were never issued nationwide.

Despite crores of rupees spent, the core aim—citizenship verification—was not fulfilled. Serious allegations arose regarding irregularities in the smart-card contracts. Data collection was outsourced to private agencies, some of which were accused of poor standards and incorrect uploads. In several areas, re-surveys had to be conducted, leading to double expenditure. Millions of people’s biometrics were taken twice because both Aadhaar and NPR were running simultaneously. This resulted in double procurement of devices, double human-resource costs, and thousands of crores of wasteful expenditure. The CAG stated that the lack of coordination between projects, incomplete cost-benefit analysis, and unclear policy direction prevented efficient use of public funds.

In 2009, Aadhaar began full-scale rollout. It became the world’s largest biometric identity project. Between 2010-2024, an estimated Rs 14,000 to Rs 16,000 crore of public money has been spent on Aadhaar.

Later, Aadhaar faced allegations of misuse and irregularities: fake enrolments, duplicate Aadhaar numbers for the same individual, fraudulent biometrics, brokers illegally enrolling people. Later, lakhs of Aadhaar numbers had to be cancelled. Media reports also pointed out data leaks from state websites and illegal trade of Aadhaar information by private agencies. The government, however, maintained that core biometric data remained secure. The Supreme Court later ruled that Aadhaar was not proof of citizenship, that making it mandatory for private services was unconstitutional, and that it could be used only for limited government schemes. It became clear that Aadhaar was a tool for welfare delivery—not a national citizenship identifier.

The Election Commission’s annual budget generally ranges between Rs 1000-2,000 crore , which covers voter-card printing, digital voter databases, BLO networks, revision drives, and cybersecurity. Before every major election, special revision of voter lists must be undertaken.

After the 2014 change of government, Congress—now in opposition—began treating identification and verification processes less as “security issues” and more as “social-political risks”. The same NPR that Chidambaram once projected as a protective shield became, for the Congress’s new leadership, a matter of human-rights and democratic concern.

Now, Rahul Gandhi and the opposition are strongly opposing the voter-list purification drive being implemented by the Election Commission. Their argument is that this could become a tool for removing the names of the poor, migrants, and minorities, affecting electoral fairness, and potentially “re-engineering” voter lists in favour of the ruling party. Rahul Gandhi argues that under the name of verification, democratic rights are being interfered with.

But during Chidambaram’s era, the NPR was seen as administrative reform and a security measure. Now, Chidambaram argues that any list which questions citizenship or voting rights must be transparent, limited, and judicially controlled. He also objects to the term “illegal Bangladeshi,” arguing that identifying illegal migrants is the government’s responsibility, but repeatedly asking citizens to prove their legitimacy goes against the nature of a democratic state.

Had NPR been fully implemented, illegal Bangladeshi migrants could have been accurately identified, fake voter lists eliminated, and the NRC process simplified. But due to political sensitivity and resistance from state governments, the NPR was reduced to a mere statistical register. Questions of citizenship were made voluntary. As a result, illegal migration remained uncontrolled, and Aadhaar despite not being proof of citizenship—became India’s primary identity system.

The Modi government has now authorised the Election Commission to carry out voter list purification based on correct citizenship. The voter list is directly linked to the roots of democracy. If the list itself is unreliable, electoral fairness will naturally come into question. For decades, voter lists have suffered from fake names, multiple voter cards for one person, dead voters remaining in lists, names of illegal migrants, and non-removal after relocation.

In this context, the Election Commission periodically runs voter list purification drives. The aim is to re-verify each voter, remove incorrect entries, eliminate duplicates, and add new names where people have moved. This is a routine administrative process, conducted autonomously and regularly. Currently, this process is being applied in some states to ensure more reliable voter lists before upcoming elections.

In the long term, the real solution is that India must eventually create a clear, lawful, universally accepted citizenship-based national identity system so that repeated voter-verification controversies do not arise.