EVMs, or Electronic Voting Machines, are often the first in the line of fire after electoral results are declared with allegations of tampering and hacking often being raised. In the past, several eyebrow-raising incidents have also occurred with EVMs involving their unauthorised transport or battery levels that have eroded the public trust in them. However, while some parties demand reverting to ballot papers in light of such allegations, the Indian government is confident in their ability to the extent that Union Ministers indulge in X spats with Elon Musk protecting EVM’s unassailabilty.
On November 26, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a similar Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought to revert from Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) to paper ballots for elections. The petition, filed by evangelist K.A. Paul, argued that EVMs are susceptible to tampering, citing concerns raised by political leaders like Chandrababu Naidu and Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy, who alleged manipulation of EVMs following their electoral defeats.
The Supreme Court, however, noted that such allegations often arise only when candidates lose, stating, “When you win the election, EVMs are not tampered with. When you lose, EVMs are tampered with”.
The bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and P.B. Varale, emphasised that the integrity of the electoral process should not be undermined by unfounded suspicions and also addressed additional requests from the petitioner, including calls for stricter regulations on electoral corruption and enhanced voter education initiatives.
The Election Commission of India has consistently defended the EVM system as well, asserting that it is secure and has effectively eliminated issues like booth capturing and invalid votes. The Supreme Court’s ruling thus aligns with its previous judgments affirming the reliability of EVMs, thereby reinforcing the current electoral framework in India.
Jargon
- Public Interest Litigation (PIL): A legal action initiated in a court of law for the protection of the public interest, often filed by individuals or groups seeking to address issues affecting the community at large.
- Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs): Devices used in elections to cast and count votes electronically, designed to enhance the efficiency and security of the voting process.
- Ballot Paper: A physical piece of paper used in elections for voters to mark their choice of candidate, traditionally used before the introduction of EVMs.
- Tampering: The act of altering or interfering with a device or system, in this context, refers to concerns about the manipulation of EVMs to affect election outcomes.
- Election Commission of India (ECI): The constitutional authority responsible for administering election processes in India, ensuring free and fair elections.
Viewpoints 💭
- The left views the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the plea to revert to paper ballots as a missed opportunity to address concerns about EVM tampering, which they argue could undermine electoral integrity.
- They emphasise the importance of transparency and accountability in the electoral process, advocating for measures like 100% VVPAT verification to ensure voter confidence.
- The left criticises the court’s reliance on the Election Commission’s assurances, suggesting that independent audits of EVMs could enhance trust in the system.
- They argue that reverting to paper ballots could reduce the potential for electronic manipulation and restore public faith in elections.
- The left highlights international practices of using paper ballots as a model for ensuring fair and transparent elections.
- The left perceives the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the ballot reversion plea as neglecting the need for greater electoral transparency, while the right views it as an affirmation of technological progress in elections.
- While the left advocates for comprehensive VVPAT verification to bolster voter confidence, the right argues that existing protocols are sufficient and that additional measures would be impractical.
- The left criticizes the reliance on the Election Commission’s assurances, suggesting independent audits, whereas the right trusts the Commission’s integrity and opposes what they see as unnecessary scrutiny.
- The left sees reverting to paper ballots as a way to mitigate electronic manipulation risks, contrasting with the right’s emphasis on the logistical and efficiency benefits of EVMs.
- The left points to international practices of paper ballots as a benchmark for electoral fairness, while the right highlights the reduction of malpractices and administrative convenience provided by EVMs.
- The right supports the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the use of EVMs, viewing it as a validation of the technological advancements in India’s electoral process.
- They argue that EVMs have significantly reduced electoral malpractices like booth capturing and invalid votes, thus enhancing the efficiency of elections.
- The right emphasises the logistical challenges and inefficiencies associated with reverting to paper ballots, particularly in a populous country like India.
- They maintain that allegations of EVM tampering are often politically motivated and lack substantial evidence, undermining the credibility of such claims.
- The right views the court’s decision as a reinforcement of trust in democratic institutions and a rejection of regressive measures that could disrupt the electoral process.
Prominent Voices 📣
- Chandrababu Naidu (Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh): Expressed concerns about EVM tampering in the past suggesting a lack of trust in the current system.
1
- YS Jagan Mohan Reddy (Former Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh): Voiced similar concerns about EVM tampering following electoral defeats, indicating skepticism towards the electronic voting process.
- Indian National Congress (Political Party): Raised doubts about the reliability of EVMs in recent elections, questioning the integrity of the electoral process.
- Prashant Bhushan (Advocate): Proposed alternatives to enhance voter confidence, including reverting to paper ballots and improving VVPAT systems.
2
3
- Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu (Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister): Advocated for a return to paper ballots, citing security concerns with EVMs.
4
- Association for Democratic Reforms (Non-profit Organisation): Argued for complete VVPAT verification to boost electoral confidence.
5
- Jairam Ramesh (Congress General Secretary): Clarified Congress’s stance on EVMs, proposing a hybrid voting system to address concerns.
- Prime Minister Narendra Modi (Prime Minister of India): Viewed the verdict as a vindication of EVMs and criticised the opposition for creating distrust.
- Arjun Ram Meghwal (Union Law Minister): Supported the SC’s decision, claiming it revealed opposition parties’ efforts to defame the Election Commission.
8
- Rajiv Kumar (Chief Election Commissioner): Reaffirmed the safety and credibility of EVMs, citing past court validations.
9
