Who is Pramila Jayapal? Chennai-born US Democrat backing protests in India over SIR, deletion of 13 crore voters

Pramila Jayapal is a Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives. She represents Washington state’s 7th Congressional District and is serving her fifth term. Her position gives her a national platform on US policy and international democratic issues.

Jayapal was elected in 2016. She is the first South Asian American woman elected to the House and one of about two dozen naturalized citizens serving in Congress. The article identifies her as 61 and says she was born in Chennai, India.

She serves on the House Judiciary and Foreign Affairs committees. She is also a former Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and holds leadership roles involving immigration, Asian Pacific American issues, and LGBTQ equality. She is seeking a sixth term, facing Republican challenger Nirav Sheth in Washington’s 7th District.

The Special Intensive Revision, or SIR, is an exercise to revise India’s electoral rolls. The process produces draft lists and checks who remains listed as a voter. It matters because electoral rolls determine who can participate in elections, while deletions can affect access to the ballot.

The Election Commission held SIR in phases across states and union territories. In the first two phases, around 7.2 crore names were deleted from draft rolls. During the third phase, draft lists covering 18 states and union territories showed another 6.16 crore deleted names.

The scale has triggered protests and allegations of irregularities from opposition parties and student groups. The Commission says a genuine voter accidentally left out can file claims and objections, then seek inclusion through Form 6. That process is the stated safeguard for correcting mistaken exclusions.

The Election Commission’s figures add up to 13.36 crore deleted names across the first three SIR phases. The first and second phases together accounted for around 7.2 crore deletions. The ongoing third phase added 6.16 crore more from draft lists covering 18 states and union territories.

These figures concern names deleted from draft electoral rolls, not necessarily final permanent exclusions. The Commission says a genuine voter whose name was inadvertently omitted can use the claims and objections process. The voter can subsequently apply through Form 6 for inclusion.

The number has become central to the political dispute. Jayapal referred to reports of 13 crore names being removed, or 130 million people, while opposition parties and student groups protest alleged irregularities. Demonstrators are also demanding Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation.

Opposition parties and student groups are protesting what they describe as irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. They object to the reported removal of very large numbers of names from draft voter lists. Their concern is that legitimate voters could be excluded from elections.

The protests have included large street demonstrations led by opposition figures, including Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi. The article says thousands attended a protest in New Delhi on 12 October. Protesters are calling for Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar to resign over the alleged problems.

The dispute remains active as the third phase continues. The Election Commission has published draft lists and says omitted genuine voters can file claims and objections, followed by Form 6. The outcome will depend on how those correction procedures address disputed removals and whether protests continue.

The Election Commission says a genuine voter whose name was accidentally left out of the revised draft roll has a formal route to correction. The voter can raise a claim or objection so the omission can be reviewed. This procedure is important because draft lists are not necessarily the final record.

After using the claims and objections process, the voter can seek inclusion through Form 6. The article presents Form 6 as the next mechanism for restoring an eligible person’s name to the electoral roll. It does not provide further details about deadlines or supporting documents.

This correction route is central to the Commission’s response to criticism of SIR. Opposition parties and student groups continue to allege irregularities, while the Commission says genuine voters can be added if they were inadvertently excluded. The effectiveness of the process will matter as revised rolls move forward.

Comments from a US Congresswoman matter because Jayapal is an elected national representative speaking publicly about another democracy’s election administration. The article identifies her remarks as the first such comments by a US lawmaker. That gives the dispute added international visibility.

Jayapal said she was deeply concerned about the reported purge of 130 million people. She supported non-violent protests and said Indian people, like Americans, deserve free and fair elections. She also compared the developments with what she described as the Trump Administration’s efforts to undermine voting rights in the United States.

Her statements do not resolve the allegations or change the Election Commission’s process. They show that the dispute has drawn attention beyond India, while protests continue at home. The Commission’s claims, objections, and Form 6 procedures remain the stated way to correct genuine voters’ omissions.

Electoral rolls protect democracy by identifying eligible voters who can take part in elections. If names are missing, eligible citizens may lose their practical ability to vote. Accurate rolls therefore support the basic promise that elections should be free and fair, a principle Jayapal emphasized in her remarks.

The SIR exercise shows how this works in practice. The Election Commission has published draft lists after deleting around 7.2 crore names in the first two phases and 6.16 crore in the third. Because draft changes can affect participation, the Commission says genuine voters can file claims and objections and then use Form 6.

These safeguards matter amid allegations that the revision contains irregularities. Protests and demands for the CEC’s resignation reflect concern about public confidence. Clear correction procedures can help restore eligible names, but the article does not state how many challenged omissions will be accepted.