Nearly a century after Mahatma Gandhi passionately advocated for universal voting rights, his arguments against wealth and literacy as prerequisites for suffrage are echoing through India's contemporary electoral landscape. As the Election Commission of India (ECI) undertakes its Special Intensive Review (SIR) of voter lists, which has led to widespread exclusions, Gandhi's historic stance has re-emerged as a crucial point of reference in discussions about voter entitlement.
Gandhi's Vision for Inclusivity in 1931
In an article published in his weekly newspaper, Young India, on October 8, 1931, Gandhi articulated a profound objection to any system that would disenfranchise individuals based on their economic status or educational attainment. He wrote, “I could not bear the idea that a man who has got wealth should have the vote, but that a man who has got character but no wealth or literacy should have no vote.”
Gandhi vehemently opposed the notion that poverty should be a barrier to civic participation, stating, “A man who works honestly by the sweat of his brow day in and day out should not have the vote for the crime of being a poor man, it is an unbearable thing.” He even declared his willingness to forgo his own voting right if it meant an “untouchable brother” remained without one.
He further challenged the “doctrine of literacy,” humorously referencing the “three Rs” (reading, writing, and arithmetic). While acknowledging the value of education, Gandhi insisted that waiting for universal literacy before granting voting rights would be an interminable delay. To manage the massive electorate, he proposed a practical solution: allowing those who wished to vote to register, thereby keeping voter lists manageable.
The Constituent Assembly Debates and Universal Adult Suffrage
Decades later, during the framing of India's Constitution in 1947, leaders like B.R. Ambedkar initially proposed making voting a fundamental right. However, an advisory committee chaired by Sardar Patel ultimately rejected this, opting instead for universal adult suffrage. This foundational principle ensured every eligible adult citizen the right to vote, irrespective of race, gender, religion, wealth, or social standing, becoming a cornerstone of Indian democracy.
KF Wilfred, former senior principal secretary at the ECI, explained that while the ideal of a fundamental right to vote was considered, the sheer scale of India's electorate presented significant logistical challenges that influenced the decision to make it a statutory right instead.
The Modern SIR Debate and Calls for Fundamental Rights
The Election Commission's recent Special Intensive Review (SIR) of voter lists has reignited this historical debate. The exercise has reportedly led to the removal of lakhs of names from electoral rolls, with many more facing potential exclusion. This has prompted experts and political figures to renew calls for elevating voting to a fundamental right, or at least ensuring the unequivocal protection of this right for all genuine adult citizens.
Courts have consistently affirmed that while voting may not be a fundamental right, it is undeniably fundamental to the functioning of India's democracy, operating as a statutory right under existing laws.
PDT Achary, former Secretary General of the Lok Sabha, highlighted that while the Supreme Court has clarified voting as a statutory right, it remains a “constitutional entitlement” under Article 326. Achary questioned the legal basis of the SIR process, noting that such special revisions were historically limited to specific border constituencies. He emphasized that citizens are “entitled under the Constitution” to be registered, not reliant on the ECI’s “charity.”
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh underscored the anomaly that while surrounding electoral rights (like knowing candidates' antecedents or ballot secrecy) have been declared fundamental by the Supreme Court, the core right to vote itself remains merely statutory. He argued that making voting a fundamental right would provide the highest level of judicial review and protection against voter suppression or arbitrary disqualifications, enhancing Supreme Court vigilance over the ECI's operations.