
Every few years, the managers of India’s operating system find ways to reinvent the debate on an old problem. A decade and a half after the inception of Aadhaar—and the global celebration of its contribution to India’s digital public infrastructure—the old chestnut of identity has surfaced yet again.
The Election Commission of India, on June 24, issued instructions for holding a ‘special intensive revision’ of the electoral rolls in Bihar. The objective: ensure eligible voters are included and no ineligible voter is on the rolls. There can be no quarrel with the objective of transparency, but the process has triggered a bunch of conspiracy theories and is the subject of rhetoric by the opposition parties.
The revision of rolls—the first since 2003—requires voters not listed on the rolls to provide proof of their place of birth and a declaration of citizenship. Of the 7.9 crore voters in Bihar, over 4.9 crore need only an extract of the 2003 listing. Those not on the rolls, though, must present documents—if born before 1 July 1987 for themselves; if born between 1987 and 2004, for themselves and one parent; and those born after December 2004, for themselves and for both parents.
Among the documents allowed for verification of citizenship are: identity card/ pension payment order issued to government/ PSU employee, identity card issued by government, banks, post office and LIC, educational certificate issued by recognised entities, permanent residence certificate, forest right certificate, caste certificate, land/ house allotment, family register, national register, passport and birth certificate.
Size and scale matter for processes. Bihar, with a population of over 13.1 crore, would rank as the 11th largest country alongside Mexico. As per the Bihar State Caste Survey, a mere 15 percent have finished class 10 and only 6 percent are graduates. The National Family Health Survey 5 reveals two contrasting profiles of literacy for Bihar and Kerala. Bihar has the lowest literacy of 55 percent among women and 76 percent among men. The Economic Survey of Bihar states that just 6.7 percent of workers are employed with the government or PSUs.
What has stirred up the political hives is the list of documents not eligible for verification. Consider the list of exclusions. Aadhaar, which by definition certifies residency and not citizenship, driving licence, PAN card, MGNREGS card, ration card, and even the photo ID issued by the Election Commission. The contrast of a lack of confidence in government-issued cards and the confidence in birth certificates is striking. Also, the invalidation of the ration and the MGNREGS cards is intriguing, given that some, if not all, of the Rs 44 lakh crore welfare payments made via direct transfers are backed by these instruments of eligibility.
The requirement of birth certificates itself flies in the face of the track record of governments to register births and deaths. The 2024 annual report of the home ministry reveals a rather dismal picture of government efficiency in states. Across the country, only 15 states register over 90 percent of births, nine register 50-80 percent and seven less than 50 percent.
How does Bihar fare? NFHS 5 reveals that one in four births in the state is not registered. This is now. The first-time voters would have been born sometime after 2005. What was the registration of births in Bihar in 2005? The 2005 home ministry annual report states that “less than 40 percent of the births were getting registered” in Bihar. Now imagine getting documents for parents born in the 1980s. While the need for establishing voter eligibility is paramount, so is the need for evangelising the registrations and fixing the gaps in making the services accessible.
The ordeal of navigating the landscape of identity and its verification is not limited to politics, but actually haunts the political economy, too. Beyond the expression of intent on ease of doing business, the fact is entrepreneurs and startups must wade through an array of ministries, depending on the domain of business, to register, maintain and present a plethora of certifications and over 69,000 compliances to operate in India.
The entrepreneur or startup must have an Aadhaar card, a PAN card and additional ID proof. The corporate affairs ministry requires a CIN or a corporate identity number, a Limited Liability Partnership Identification Number for LLPs, and a FCRN or FLLPIN for foreign companies, DIN or director identity number, a SPICe form, and digital signature certificate. The finance ministry wants a GST number, and a TAN or tax deduction account number. The labour ministry needs EPFO and ESIC registration. The MSME ministry requires registration of an Udhyam number. Then there are other registrations required for operations like the Shop & Establishment Act registration, trade licence, professional tax registration and local certificate for office premises.
Effectively, the MCA knows the entrepreneur through CIN, LLPIN, DIN, and the finance ministry through PAN, GSTN and TAN—and the twain do not meet. It is arguable that these are necessary to start businesses. But in reality, beyond the initiation of registrations, the entrepreneur must maintain and present all or any of the certifications every time it is asked for. Why not create a common identity—say, a BIN or Bharat Investor Number—which is interoperable across ministries, and represents the underlying compliances? This will afford the ease of business and visibility for data, not discretion-driven governance.
The triumvirate of ease of living, governance and business requires reforms at what the government calls the ‘last mile’, but is really the first mile of governance.
Read all columns by Shankkar Aiyar
Author of The Gated Republic, Aadhaar: A Biometric History of India’s 12 Digit
Revolution, and Accidental India
(shankkar.aiyar@gmail.com)