The BJP lead government wants India’s electoral map to be redrawn, and the method being used to do it is already under scrutiny.
The Narendra Modi government is on the verge of tabling a Delimitation Bill for Parliament. It’s reportedly going to expand Lok Sabha seats from 543 to 850. Each state’s share of seats would be determined by the latest census.
The exercise has so far been completed in only two places, Assam and Jammu & Kashmir. And how it was done there is already raising questions.
Political observers point to a troubling pattern. Different criteria were applied in each case, and both outcomes allegedly favoured the BJP.
In Jammu & Kashmir, population data was selectively used to shrink the seat share of the Muslim-majority Kashmir region while the Hindu-majority Jammu region gained.
The Anantnag Lok Sabha seat was redrawn to pull in Muslim-majority areas from Jammu — on the other side of the Pir Panjal Mountain range. Geography, it seems, was not a consideration.
In Assam, the logic was similar. Muslim-majority areas lost seats even where the population numbers argued for more.
The J&K model, allocating seats by latest census population, will now apply nationally.
The math tells a stark story. Uttar Pradesh, currently holding 80 seats, should have received 125 in an 850-seat house. Due to higher population growth, it will instead get 138. Bihar moves from an expected 62 to 72. Rajasthan goes from 39 to 47.
Southern states face the opposite outcome. Tamil Nadu should have received 61 seats; it will get 50. Kerala drops from an expected 31 to 23. Andhra Pradesh falls from 39 to 34.
These southern states also happen to be where the BJP performs weakest.
The Gerrymandering Charge
Critics are invoking a concept from American politics: gerrymandering, the deliberate redrawing of electoral boundaries to benefit one party.
Two techniques are central to this strategy.
The basic principle of democracy is one person, one vote. By extension, each Lok Sabha seat should have roughly the same number of voters. In Assam, that benchmark is 17.5 lakh voters per seat.
Packing is simple in concept. You crowd Opposition voters into as few seats as possible. They win those seats comfortably but lose almost everywhere else. Dhubri in Assam is the example critics keep coming back to. It was loaded with nearly 10 lakh extra voters, well beyond the 17.5 lakh benchmark. Those voters were quietly moved over from the neighbouring Barpeta seat.
Cracking works the other way. Instead of crowding Opposition voters together, you scatter them. Spread thin across many seats, they never have enough weight to win any. Barpeta is the example here too. Once its Muslim-majority population was moved out, it flipped to a Hindu-majority seat almost overnight.
Former J&K Education Minister Naeem Akhtar said the delimitation commission used the same logic in both states. He described it as a deliberate reduction in the electoral value of one community against another, amounting, in his words, to permanent disempowerment.
Three Steps, One Outcome
An editorial has broken down the alleged strategy into three moves.
Step one penalises states with lower population growth, mostly in the South and Punjab, by reducing their seat share.
These happen to be BJP’s weakest territories.
Step two applies census data selectively.
In Assam, the 2001 census was used (not the latest figures) to protect communities that have historically backed the BJP. The same protection was not extended to southern or Punjabi minorities who stand to lose under current population data.
Step three replicates the Assam-J&K model of gerrymandering nationally, the editorial adds. Opposition strongholds are expected to be packed into fewer seats or cracked across many, reducing their overall parliamentary footprint.
The concerns don’t stop at boundaries. Experts have pointed to the way manipulation now touches every stage of the electoral process, from seat allocation and boundary drawing to voter rolls, polling deployment, model code of conduct enforcement, and election-day conduct.
Political funding, observers note, hasn’t even entered the conversation yet.
Also Read: Crores In, Votes Out: The Curious Case of Gujarat’s ‘Paper’ Parties https://www.vibesofindia.com/crores-in-votes-out-the-curious-case-of-gujarats-paper-parties/
