Tweet
No decision yet on EVM use in Assembly polls
The upcoming Assembly polls in five States are most likely to use electronic voting machines (EVMs). With the poll process already started in these States and the Delhi High Court staying a petition seeking to conduct elections using ballot papers, the matter could not be decided on Tuesday.
After nearly two hours of argument, the court on Tuesday reserved its order on the PIL filed by Janata Party president Subramaniam Swamy saying EVMs were not tamper-proof. Swamy sought to bring in the old system of ballot papers or equip EVMs with printers to provide a paper receipt.
However, the Election Commission has countered the arguments, saying the method of conducting elections was its statute and the court could not interfere.
Assembly elections are scheduled in Uttarakhand, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Goa and Manipur in February and March.
Arguing before a division Bench of Acting Chief Justice AK Sikri and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, Swamy said transparency in elections was a right of the citizen and so, voting machines needed to be made more acceptable and transparent. “No matter if replacing EVMs consume huge quantity of paper; we have been doing with this system for the last 60 years. If the voter does not get acknowledgement of his vote, the electronic record ceases to have originated. This is in violation of the IT Act besides the constitutional right. The court should give its judicial view as to what should be done to ensure free and fair elections,” Swamy argued.
“We are using a machine that has not been granted patent and is completely unsafe. Even the micro-processor which controls the functioning of EVM is not tamper-proof,” he added.
Swamy cited instances of other democracies - including the US, UK and Germany - where ballot paper continues to be used.
Former Attorney General Ashok Desai, appearing for the Election Commission, said, “Introducing paper receipt after casting the vote
will violate the secrecy of elections. The existing election laws do not permit for paper trail.”
He added that the petitioner had not cited a single instance of misuse of EVM in a particular election or constituency.
Desai sought to convince that paper trail or the use of ballot papers was not feasible as not only it would require immense expenditure but also result in cutting down forests given the huge quantity of paper that would be required for the purpose.
“If we assume that all political parties are ready to remove EVMs, they can simply change the law to restrict their use. The method and the manner in which election has to be conducted, is the statute of the Election Commission. The court can not interfere with it,” Desai added.
The upcoming Assembly polls in five States are most likely to use electronic voting machines (EVMs). With the poll process already started in these States and the Delhi High Court staying a petition seeking to conduct elections using ballot papers, the matter could not be decided on Tuesday.
After nearly two hours of argument, the court on Tuesday reserved its order on the PIL filed by Janata Party president Subramaniam Swamy saying EVMs were not tamper-proof. Swamy sought to bring in the old system of ballot papers or equip EVMs with printers to provide a paper receipt.
However, the Election Commission has countered the arguments, saying the method of conducting elections was its statute and the court could not interfere.
Assembly elections are scheduled in Uttarakhand, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Goa and Manipur in February and March.
Arguing before a division Bench of Acting Chief Justice AK Sikri and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, Swamy said transparency in elections was a right of the citizen and so, voting machines needed to be made more acceptable and transparent. “No matter if replacing EVMs consume huge quantity of paper; we have been doing with this system for the last 60 years. If the voter does not get acknowledgement of his vote, the electronic record ceases to have originated. This is in violation of the IT Act besides the constitutional right. The court should give its judicial view as to what should be done to ensure free and fair elections,” Swamy argued.
“We are using a machine that has not been granted patent and is completely unsafe. Even the micro-processor which controls the functioning of EVM is not tamper-proof,” he added.
Swamy cited instances of other democracies - including the US, UK and Germany - where ballot paper continues to be used.
Former Attorney General Ashok Desai, appearing for the Election Commission, said, “Introducing paper receipt after casting the vote
will violate the secrecy of elections. The existing election laws do not permit for paper trail.”
He added that the petitioner had not cited a single instance of misuse of EVM in a particular election or constituency.
Desai sought to convince that paper trail or the use of ballot papers was not feasible as not only it would require immense expenditure but also result in cutting down forests given the huge quantity of paper that would be required for the purpose.
“If we assume that all political parties are ready to remove EVMs, they can simply change the law to restrict their use. The method and the manner in which election has to be conducted, is the statute of the Election Commission. The court can not interfere with it,” Desai added.
