South Central 49: EC’s Push for SIR and High Courts on Sexual Assault Cases
The latest episode of the podcast South Central explores pivotal developments in southern India. Hosts Dhanya Rajendran and Anisha Seth engage with activist and psephologist Yogendra Yadav, along with former lawyer and journalist Sukanya Shaji, to unpack these issues.
ECI’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) Debate
The discussion opens with the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision of voter rolls and the controversies surrounding its intent and execution. Yogendra Yadav raises concerns about the neutrality of the Election Commission of India (ECI), emphasizing that it appears to act more as a promotional entity than a constitutional authority.
“The EC is no longer acting as a neutral, constitutional body.”
“Many of its press conferences now come off as PR exercises.”
“The ECI has not learnt that a large-scale exercise like the SIR mandates the question of whether this was the right move at all.”
“ECI decided that SIR is the medicine and started looking for a disease to fit that.”
Judicial Responses to Sexual Assault Cases
In the second half of the episode, the panel reviews two recent high court judgments. The first concerns a case in Kerala, where a Bengali actor accused director Ranjith of harassment dating back to 2009. The complaint emerged in 2024 following the Hema Committee report. The second case in Karnataka involves a woman who accused a man she met via a dating app of sexual assault.
Both high courts have quashed the respective FIRs, a decision that invites criticism from the panel.
“It’s not a good precedent,” Sukanya remarks, highlighting the worrying message such rulings convey about accountability in sexual assault cases.
About the Podcast
South Central is a show that examines the voices and stories shaping the southern regions of India, providing listeners with in-depth context on politics, social issues, and justice.
Author’s Summary
The episode critically examines the Election Commission’s controversial voter roll revisions and troubling court decisions that weaken confidence in justice for sexual assault survivors.