Ink that protects the sanctity of elections
How Salimuzzaman Siddiqui developed “Siddiquink” that protects against impersonation in the voting process
On the eve of elections to the Lok Sabha, it is natural — and desirable — to think of the first general elections that took place in India, between October 1951 and February 1952. That election year for the country’s 360 million people was the first such in independent India professing no single religion, no single doctrine whether political or ideological. The only qualification for an Indian citizen to vote was age — the person, man or woman, of any or no religious denomination, of any or no caste, educated or not, propertied or not, should be above 21 years of age.
By this calculation, 173 million Indian men and women became entitled to vote and elect their governments and their Opposition. A bigger election had not been held anywhere in the world. India could, and did, take pride in — a global pride — the fact that its suffrage was going to be universal, free and fair.
The year 1951 needs to be remembered by and for, and as many things as one can in the context of that election but also very specially, as the year of an ink — the indelible ink used to mark voters’ left forefingers to prevent multiple voting by impersonation. We have moved now from the paper ballot to the EVM but the inking of fingers remains in place. Because the risk of impersonation remains in place!
The inking had to be done before being given the ballot paper. This column today is about the making of that ink, which is a story in itself. And it is wrapped around the younger of two brothers from Mirzapur, Khaliquzzaman (1889-1973) and Salimuzzaman Siddiqui (1897-1994). The first of them was a politician, a leading light of the Muslim League, who knew well India’s political leadership in both the Congress and Muslim League, and the second, in a very different field — chemistry and chemistry research. Salimuzzaman, who, unlike his brother, kept his family name of Siddiqui, is indelibly linked to the evolution of a feat in chemistry and Indian public life — indelible election ink.
Siddiqui, working as a chemist in the Indian Council for Scientific and Industrial Research in the mid-1940s, was contacted by its director general Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar (1894-1955), who asked him to help with the formulation of an indelible ink which could be used in the elections that were due to the new Constituent Assembly. Bhatnagar, a distinguished chemist himself, sent to Siddiqui a solution of silver chloride to see if that could be developed into the required ink for use by the Election Commission of India (ECI). I am no chemist and am using these names mechanically, without understanding their chemical properties, only their salience to our elections.
Siddiqui found the silver chloride did not stain well. So, he added silver bromide to it and, I am told, there was an immediate improvement in the staining power. Working on that combination, Siddiqui was able to start the manufacture of the indelible ink for use in the 1951-52 elections.
An unsubstantiated story has it that Quink, the famous Parker pen ink owes its name to a Filipino, Francisco Quisumbing, who had made and was propagating an ink called Quisumbing Ink which became Quink. Be that as it may, the ink that Siddiqui developed should really have been unofficially called Siddiquink. The ink was introduced for the 1951-1952 elections and irrespective of who won and who lost in that election, Siddiqui’s indelible ink was a winner in what it was seeking to win — indelibility and impersonation stalling.
I was six years old at the time and the memory I have of that election — and it is indelible — is of my parents coming back from the polling station and chatting about the new experience of having their fingers marked by voters’ indelible ink. We, their children at home, crowded around them to examine this new curiosity, when an old friend of the family walked in just then, also having just voted. He said to my father that he had heard — typical of our sceptical minds — that the ink was not all that indelible and that impersonation could take place by people removing it with a moistened matchstick tip. What, really! And pronto, a matchbox was obtained from the kitchen, two matchstick-tips dipped in water, followed by both gentlemen trying with great seriousness to do the little cosmetic act. But — kudos to Siddiqui and the Election Commission the ink stain would not go. It became fainter, yes, but disappear it would not. Their fingertip skins smarting under the “attack”, the two gentlemen complimented ECI and started talking about other things which did not interest me.
There is a sequel to this that is of interest.
The Partition of India was only four years old and the newly born country was setting up its political and institutional systems. The first Prime Minister of Pakistan, Nawabzada Liaquat Ali Khan, is believed to have contacted Salimuzzaman Siddiqui and invited him to migrate to Pakistan and help its chemical enterprises. The story is that Salimuzzaman, the younger brother of the Muslim League politician Chaudhuri Khaliquzzaman, was known to Nehru, and went to him for advice. Contrary to what one may imagine, Nehru said to him he could go. And he did, to rise to some status as a pharmacological chemist, becoming the founder and chairman of the National Science Council of Pakistan. But his ink remained in India, indelibly, on millions of forefingers, resurrecting itself, in election after election, safeguarding the peoples’ mandates.
I would like to end this column by saying our elections are, above everything else, a great equaliser, a great leveller. From the President of India down to the most humble voter, all vote equally and are inked by the same ink, exactly like each other.
Could anyone have dared impersonate the President of India?
Of course not.
But President KR Narayanan, in the 1999 elections, exercised his franchise. He was what he liked to think himself to be, a citizen President and gladly had his forefinger inked exactly like the voter who went just before him and the one who went just after him, did.
And his vote joined the millions of other votes in the great churn of ballots that make India’s electoral democracy what it is — a matter of pride, if also of concern about its “bio-chemistry” that requires great vigilance against subversions, of which voter-impersonation is but one.
Gopalkrishna Gandhi, a former administrator and diplomat, is a student of modern Indian history. The views expressed are personal
wREAD an exclusive excerpt from Why We Die: The New Science of Ageing and the Quest for Immortality, by Venki Ramakrishnan
If you’re having trouble making idli and dosa batter at home, don’t beat yourself up. Getting a microbial culture to grow well but not too well, takes a lot of practice. There are factors outside one’s control at play too, such as the weather.
Once the code is cracked, though, it becomes so easy, it feels like reflex. Here are some of my favourite hacks, honed through years of failure and annoyance (largely at myself, sometimes at the batter.)
The first thing I learnt was that urad dal plays a crucial role.
Idlis and dosas may be made of fermented rice, but that rice isn’t going to ferment as well without this dal. Why? Because one needs a fair amount of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) to form in such a mix.
LAB is an umbrella term for strains such as Lactobacillus casei, Lactococcus lactis and Streptococcus thermophilus that produce lactic acid during fermentation. This acid is what gives idlis, dahi, dhokla and sourdough bread their sour tang.
In nature, LAB are found in soil, roots and shoots, and in legumes such as urad dal. There, they share a symbiotic relationship with plants, drawing nutrition from their root systems while helping them fight fungi and other microbial pathogens.
Adding soaked and ground urad dal doesn’t just help generate lactic acid. It also releases enzymes to help turn the starches in the batter into smaller units of sugar, which feed the microbes and help them multiply. So the dal really speeds things up.
At a pinch, moong or chana dal can be used, but urad is the most effective, and yields idlis that are whiter, softer and airier.
In fact, the same off-putting slimy texture one encounters in boiled urad dal is the reason it is perfect for idlis. The sliminess comes from a gum called arabinogalactan, which helps enfold air and form bubbles in batter. The gum holds on to this air even in very high temperatures, which is why the eventual steamed idlis are light and “fluffy”.
Now to the rice for the batter. I’m afraid it really must be parboiled (boiled while it is still in its husk). This causes retrograded starch, which forms a thicker, more viscous batter. (Parboiled rice absorbs nutrients from the husk, and is thus healthier too.)
The thicker batter traps gases more effectively. I have conducted experiments in which I fermented batters made with raw rice and parboiled rice side by side. The parboiled rice fermented much faster too (as much as six to eight hours faster, thereby reducing the risk of spoilage).
Incidentally, it helps to keep temperature consistent during fermentation; the ideal range being 30 to 40 degrees Celsius. The closer to 40 degrees Celsius, the faster fermentation occurs, but opt for consistency over heat if you can only have one of the two.
It takes eight to 15 hours to ferment batter. After 24 hours, you must refrigerate it (no matter how under-fermented) or, sadly, throw it away. The risk of spoilage is too high if you continue fermenting beyond this point.
Someone once asked me what I make of shortcuts such as idli rice and idli rava. I am in favour of anything that makes the home cook’s already-difficult job any easier, of course, but here’s my take in some detail.
Idli rice is a subset of parboiled rice selected for the purpose of making white, fluffy idlis. It typically has thicker grains and higher levels of amylopectin, allowing the batter to absorb water more easily, making for moister, and therefore softer, idlis.
Idli rava is a crushed form of idli rice that does not require soaking. Just add warm water and urad dal for batter. It’s a good readymade option. The granular texture yields idlis that are not pasty. However, the larger particle size will keep you from spreading the batter thinly on a tava, so I generally avoid making dosas from idli rava.
On that note, happy fermenting. However you choose to do it, I promise it gets easier!
(To reach Swetha Sivakumar with questions or feedback, email upgrademyfood@gmail.com)