West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Monday wrote once again to Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, sharply criticising the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and alleging that “AI-driven digitisation errors” from the past are now causing widespread hardship to genuine voters across the state. In her fifth letter to the Election Commission of India (ECI) since the SIR exercise began, Banerjee accused the poll body of adopting a mechanical, insensitive, and constitutionally flawed approach that, she said, is undermining democratic rights and harassing citizens.

At the core of Banerjee’s complaint is the digitisation of the 2002 electoral rolls, which she claimed was carried out using artificial intelligence tools that introduced serious errors into voters’ records. According to her, these errors have resurfaced during the current SIR exercise, leading to large-scale mismatches in electors’ particulars and the wrongful categorisation of genuine voters as having “logical discrepancies”.

In her letter, Banerjee argued that voters whose details had already been corrected and validated through due process over the last two decades are now being forced to re-establish their identity. She said this was happening despite the fact that many such corrections were made after quasi-judicial hearings conducted by election authorities in earlier revisions.

“Electors are being compelled to re-establish their identity despite earlier corrections made after quasi-judicial hearings,” Banerjee wrote, accusing the Election Commission of disregarding its own statutory processes and institutional memory. “Such an approach, disowning its own actions and mechanisms spanning more than two decades, is arbitrary, illogical and contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution of India.”

The chief minister contended that the present exercise effectively nullifies the credibility of past electoral revisions and places an unfair burden on voters, particularly senior citizens and those from vulnerable sections of society. She said that instead of rectifying technical errors internally, the ECI was shifting the onus onto ordinary citizens to prove their legitimacy as voters.

Banerjee also raised concerns about procedural lapses in the SIR exercise. She alleged that no proper acknowledgements were being issued to voters for documents submitted during the revision process, leaving them uncertain about whether their papers had been accepted or processed. This, she claimed, made the entire procedure “fundamentally flawed” and opaque.

“The absence of proper acknowledgement itself vitiates the process,” she wrote, adding that it creates anxiety among voters and opens the door to arbitrariness. According to her, such gaps in procedure erode public trust in the electoral system.

In one of the strongest sections of her letter, Banerjee criticised what she described as the overly technical and impersonal nature of the SIR hearings. She alleged that the process had become “largely mechanical, driven purely by technical data”, with little or no application of human judgment, empathy, or contextual understanding.

“The hearing process is completely devoid of the application of mind, sensitivity and human touch,” she said, warning that such an approach undermines “the bedrock of our democracy and constitutional framework”. Banerjee argued that elections are not merely administrative exercises but democratic processes that must be conducted with fairness, dignity, and respect for citizens.

Highlighting what she called the human cost of the ongoing revision, Banerjee made a grave allegation that the SIR exercise has already resulted in tragic consequences. She claimed that the process, which she said should have been constructive and facilitative, has instead generated fear and intimidation among voters and officials alike.

“This unplanned exercise has already seen 77 deaths, with four attempts to suicide and 17 persons falling sick and necessitating hospitalisation,” she wrote, attributing these incidents to “fear, intimidation and disproportionate workload due to unplanned exercise undertaken by ECI”. While the Election Commission has not publicly accepted these figures, Banerjee’s letter sought to underline what she described as the severe psychological and physical toll of the exercise.

The chief minister also condemned what she called the harassment of eminent and widely respected citizens during the SIR process. Citing specific examples, Banerjee said Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen, renowned Bengali poet Joy Goswami, actor and Member of Parliament Deepak Adhikari, international cricketer Mohammed Shami, and the Maharaj of Bharat Sevashram Sangha were all subjected to what she described as an “unplanned, insensitive and inhuman process”.

Referring to these cases, Banerjee questioned the Election Commission’s approach and judgment. “Does this not amount to sheer audacity on the part of the ECI?” she asked, suggesting that if such prominent individuals could be subjected to what she termed harassment, the plight of ordinary voters was likely to be far worse.

Banerjee also drew attention to the specific difficulties faced by women voters. She said that women who had shifted to their matrimonial homes after marriage and changed their surnames were being repeatedly questioned and summoned for hearings to prove their identity.

“This not only reflects a complete lack of social sensitivity but also constitutes a grave insult to women and genuine voters,” she wrote. “Is this how a constitutional authority treats half of the electorate?”

According to the chief minister, such practices ignore social realities and disproportionately burden women, many of whom may lack easy access to old documents or face logistical challenges in attending hearings.

Throughout her letter, Banerjee accused the Election Commission of prioritising rigid technical compliance over democratic inclusiveness. She warned that an excessive reliance on AI-driven systems and data matching, without adequate human oversight, risks excluding genuine voters and weakening confidence in the electoral process.

She urged the ECI to immediately review and correct what she described as systemic flaws in the SIR exercise. Calling for urgent intervention, Banerjee asked the poll panel to end what she termed the “harassment and agony of the citizens and the official machinery” and to take concrete steps to safeguard democratic rights.

Her latest letter adds to a growing and increasingly sharp exchange between the West Bengal government and the Election Commission over the SIR exercise. While the ECI has maintained that the revision process is aimed at ensuring accurate and updated electoral rolls, Banerjee’s repeated communications suggest deep mistrust and concern over how the exercise is being implemented on the ground.

As the SIR continues, the confrontation raises broader questions about the balance between technology-driven governance and human-centered democratic processes. Banerjee’s intervention has once again placed the spotlight on whether electoral reforms, however well-intentioned, risk alienating voters if they are perceived as opaque, insensitive, or coercive.

For now, the chief minister has made it clear that she intends to keep pressing the issue until what she sees as fundamental problems in the SIR process are addressed. Whether the Election Commission responds with changes or further clarifications may determine how the controversy unfolds in the weeks ahead, with significant implications for voter confidence and the integrity of the electoral process in West Bengal.