Congress surrounds Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis from SIAR...

Mumbai (Anant Nalavde) – Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis directly targets Congress on Friday, citing its own old parliamentary role amid conflict over the state's special deep voter list revision (SIR).

He posted a video of former Union Law Minister Kapil Sibbal’s parliamentary speech on social media, questioning Congress’s current contradictory stance. “The colours of politics have changed, but the parliamentary records remain unchanged. Who is true, who is false – you decide!” he challenged the opposition in these words.

While the BJP cites the old speech, Congress’s objection focuses on the transparency of the current SIR implementation and the potential risk of excluding eligible voters from the rolls. Thus, the dispute has become not just about old statements but also about the reliability of the voter list and the public’s trust in the electoral process.

Fadnavis’s claim… and Congress’s role has changed…!

Chief Minister Fadnavis referenced the parliamentary remarks of former Law Minister Kapil Sibbal, made during the UPA government’s tenure, in a video he posted on X on 9 October. He alleged that Sibbal had supported the voter list revision process at that time. While Congress protests against SIR today, Fadnavis urges the public to scrutinise the former minister’s old role from his own government.

He linked Congress’s current stance to political convenience, using official parliamentary records to demand answers from the opposition. The BJP, supporting SIR, stresses the need to verify duplicate entries and names of deceased persons in the voter rolls. However, only by comparing the exact reference of Sibbal’s old speech with the provisions of the current process can the scope of this claim be clarified.

What is Congress’s objection now… Will eligible voters be excluded under the guise of revision…?

Congress has raised concerns that the implementation of SIR may lead to the exclusion of eligible voters from the rolls, errors in verification, and lack of transparency in the process. Opponents argue that while there is no objection to the goal of purging the voter list, the process must be fair, transparent, and protect the voting rights of eligible voters.

Against this backdrop, Congress opposes SIR and criticises the Election Commission’s functioning. Thus, the issue raised by Fadnavis regarding the old parliamentary role and the questions raised by Congress about the current implementation are two separate matters. Citing an old speech does not automatically resolve every objection to the current process; similarly, allegations of potential errors must be verified based on facts.

The political conflict centres on the voter list.

BJP, supporting SIR, promotes the slogan “One citizen, one vote” and the issue of an accurate voter list. On the other hand, opponents raise questions about transparency in the electoral process and protection of voters’ rights. Recently, protests against SIR have intensified the political conflict over the Election Commission’s role.

In all this turmoil, Chief Minister Fadnavis has used Kapil Sibbal’s old speech to question Congress’s political credibility. The decisive issue in this dispute will no longer be merely who said what earlier. The key question will be how to ensure that no eligible voter is wronged while eliminating errors from the voter rolls.