6 min readMay 15, 2026 06:20 AM IST First published on: May 15, 2026 at 06:20 AM ISTScientists call it phase transition. They mark it at a point where an object suddenly changes its state on crossing a threshold — water freezing into ice, or boiling into steam, for example. Elections in West Bengal and Assam mark a similar phase transition from doubtful to dubious elections.Now, complaints about electoral irregularity in our system are as old as our elections. But this routine cacophony of disquiet that dominates any functioning democracy elided a fundamental shift in the nature of our unease with the practice of elections. We began by questioning the nature of Westminster-style representative democracy. Then we focussed it down to electoral system design — first-past-the-post or proportional. From here, we slid further into a passionate debate about a yet narrower issue — the nature of candidates and campaigning. Over the last few years, our debates have revolved around the rock-bottom issue of electoral integrity — polling and counting irregularities.AdvertisementIt is not that allegations of polling and counting irregularities were unheard of in the past. Yet these were scandals, noticed and debated precisely because they were exceptions. Indian elections were held up as a model of feasible electoral democracy in post-colonial countries as almost all the elections passed a minimum threshold of integrity. In the last instance, electoral outcomes reflected popular will. There are just a handful of exceptions to this rule — assembly elections in Punjab in 1992, J&K in 1987, Assam in 1983 and West Bengal in 1972. You could add some more elections in J&K and Nagaland to this list. These were the exceptions, not the norm.Now we are witnessing a shift in the norm. This is where the concept of “phase transition” becomes relevant. For the first time, we are looking at a string of elections where you can debate whether the overall outcome reflected popular will. Having watched elections for over four decades, I still cannot make sense of the final outcome in the assembly elections of Madhya Pradesh in 2023 and Haryana as well as Maharashtra in 2024. To be fair, no one has, as yet, clinching proof. In the absence of any visible traces, we did not know where and how to find out. These remained doubtful elections.The recent elections in Assam and West Bengal change this. To be fair, Mamata Banerjee and Rahul Gandhi’s allegations of “election chori” in both these states are still allegations waiting for proof. My own impression is that Congress would have lost Assam even if there were no irregularities. It is harder to say that about West Bengal, but it is undeniable that there was a lot of popular disaffection against the incumbent TMC government in the state. So, it is not that we now have incontrovertible proof of the overturning of the popular mandate. What we have, now, is clear evidence of electoral manipulation that can be traced and documented. We can keep debating the quantum and impact of these manipulations, but cannot deny that we are now in the zone marked “dubious”. If we do not draw the line here, we could be saying goodbye to electoral democracy as we have known it.AdvertisementThe delimitation of constituencies in Assam was not simply a case of selective gerrymandering in some seats. This was about the ECI carrying out a brazenly partisan and communal redrawing of electoral boundaries so as to tilt the electoral battleground in favour of the BJP. The ruling party began the elections with an advantage of 20-30 seats: Reduction of about 20 assembly constituencies where Muslim or Ahom voters were decisive and addition of about 10 seats where Bengali Hindus or Bodos were now decisive. This systemic manipulation in Assam and a similar exercise in J&K now threaten to become a template for the next nationwide delimitation.West Bengal is an instance of multiple organ failure of electoral integrity. This failure is obfuscated by an excessive focus on the SIR and that too on the exact impact of the SIR on the final outcome. Just as the debate on electoral reforms has narrowed down, so has the debate on the SIR — from a claim that it led to no wrongful deletion to a plea that the wrongful deletions were not targeted, and now to an argument that targeted deletions were possibly less than the final margin of victory. The last point can be settled. The case that the BJP would have lost elections but for the SIR rests on treating all 91 lakh deletions as suspect. Such a reading casts doubts on the final outcome in 158 seats, of which the BJP won 105. So far, the available evidence supports a more modest claim of 26 seats that the BJP may have won due to the most dubious deletion of 27 lakh names.you may likeThat, however, is not the most consequential issue. The real issue for those concerned about electoral integrity is whether West Bengal presents a case of partisan curation of the voters’ list at a scale that could alter the nature of party competition. The real issue for those concerned with a modicum of transparency is where and how we get basic information on how this curation took place. To those who still remember the Model Code of Conduct, the real question is whether the ruling party can flout it and the law of the land, to openly use hatred as campaign strategy. To those who believe in the fiction of free and fair elections, the real question is whether the ECI can act as an arm of the ruling party, whether yesterday’s umpire can overnight become the winning team’s player.We do not know where to look for redressal. The ECI is compromised. The Supreme Court has been a spectator so far. Perhaps we need a Peoples’ Commission to bring out the truth. We don’t know if that would work. All we know is that we cannot keep walking down this slope any further. It is already too late. But if we miss this phase transition, there may be nothing left to recover.The writer is member, Swaraj India, and national convenor, Bharat Jodo Abhiyaan. Views are personal