Donald Trump made a surprise appearance - in thought, not in person - Thursday at the Supreme Court as it heard challenges to the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision of voter lists.
The EC faces petitions from opposition lawmakers and civil activists who have questioned the timing and legality of exercises in Bihar, Bengal, Tamil Nadu, and other states, arguing it amounts to collusion between the poll body and the ruling BJP.
Petitioners have also argued the EC's voter re-verification initiative - based on scrutiny of a limited number of government-issued identities - blurs the line between roll revision and citizenship determination, for which the EC has no mandate.
To support that argument some petitioners cited aspects of American law. The EC, though, flatly rejected any comparison, countering, "Where is America itself following due process?" And it then referred to Trump's attempt to bully Denmark into surrendering control of Greenland and the use of American military force in Venezuela.
"President Trump talks about taking the Venezuelan President (Nicolas Maduro) and putting him on trial... and now he wants Greenland. Where is the due process?"
Thursday's hearing on this contentious matter revolved around the court asking the EC if it had the authority to verify an individual's citizenship during an SIR exercise.
The court pointed out the concerned rules do not mention grant of this authority and refers to internal, rather than international or illegal, migration.
The court acknowledged that internal migration over the past 20 years had led to large-scale changes in electoral rolls and that this increased the possibility of duplication, intentional or otherwise, which the EC has repeatedly said is the target of SIR exercises nationwide. But, the court said, the Election Commission will have to explain why it had stepped into that space.
In response senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the EC, argued the term 'migration', as used in the rules, includes inter- and intra-state movement. That argument, however, was shot down; Justice Bagchi said every Indian enjoys a constitutional right to inter-state migration, and such movement cannot be termed illegal.
Poll body an 'unruly horse'?
The EC has had a tough couple of days in the Supreme Court in this case.
On Wednesday it was asked if the poll body had "untrammelled powers" to deviate from its own rules and provisions of the Representation of the People (RP) Act.
READ | Can EC Exercise Its Powers Like "Unruly Horse?" Supreme Court On SIR
The bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant observed the manner of the conduct of the revision must conform to principles of natural justice. "Revision of voter list can lead to some civil consequences for a person who is on the list, so if something will affect the civil rights of people, why shouldn't the process followed be in accordance with sub-section 2?" he asked.
