Introduction
In the dynamic landscape of Indian elections, few topics have sparked as much debate and controversy as the use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). While the Election Commission of India (ECI) has steadfastly defended the integrity and security of these devices, opposition parties have raised concerns over their vulnerability to potential tampering or manipulation.
EVM machine | NDTV
The Origins of EVMs in India
The idea of using EVMs for elections in India can be traced back nearly five decades. It was during the Janata Party's rule between 1977 and 1979 that the concept was first conceived. However, it wasn't until 1982, during Indira Gandhi's tenure as Prime Minister, that EVMs were piloted in an election at the Parur assembly constituency in Kerala. Despite initial resistance from Gandhi's government, the Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in favor of the ECI, paving the way for the widespread adoption of EVMs in the country's electoral process.
In 1988, the Rajiv Gandhi government took a significant step by amending the Representation of the People Act 1951, adding Section 61A, which empowered the ECI to use EVMs for general elections. This amendment came into force on March 15, 1989, marking a new era in Indian elections. The first parliamentary election conducted entirely using EVMs was in 2004, a poll that the incumbent BJP government unexpectedly lost, suggesting no foul play in the use of the machines.
Evolution of EVM Technology
India's EVMs have undergone three generations of design changes, each iteration aimed at enhancing functionality and security. The first generation, M1 EVMs, were used from 2001 to 2006, followed by the M2 EVMs, which were deployed from 2006 to 2013. The current generation, M3 EVMs, has been in use since 2013 and was developed by the state-owned Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) during the tenure of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's UPA 2 government. If any flaws exist in the design of M3 EVMs, it would raise questions about the role of the UPA 2 administration in their development and implementation.
The Genius of EVMs
One of the key strengths of EVMs lies in their simplicity. Unlike the versatile "micro-processor" chips found in laptops and phones, which can run various programs, EVMs use specialized "micro-controller" chips that execute fixed programs. These chips differ not only in manufacturing processes but also in memory types; some, like RAM (Random Access Memory), are volatile and lose data when powered off, while others, like Flash memory, retain data even after power is removed.
EVMs rely on ROM (read-only memory) that can be programmed just once, making them "One Time Programmable" (OTP) devices. The source code for EVMs is meticulously written by BEL engineers and burned into the OTP memory of the micro-controller chips. This process is irreversible, and the integrity of the burned code is rigorously verified using a special error-checking code called "checksum/CRC," ensuring the utmost security and reliability.
Since India currently lacks significant semiconductor manufacturing capabilities, these micro-controller chips are imported from foreign companies, primarily from the United States and Japan. BEL, the state-owned electronics company responsible for manufacturing EVMs, does not use any customized chips but rather relies on standard off-the-shelf micro-controller chips sourced from multiple vendors.
Advantages of Using EVMs
The use of EVMs in Indian elections offers numerous advantages, contributing to the overall integrity and efficiency of the electoral process:
1. Elimination of invalid votes: As voting is done by pressing a button, there is no risk of invalid votes due to improper marking or ink smudging, as is commonly seen in the traditional paper ballot system.
2. Prevention of booth capturing: The technology used in EVMs, coupled with strict administrative procedures, makes booth capturing an ineffective tactic. The machines are designed to prevent more than four votes per minute under any circumstances, allowing ample time for security forces to respond to any attempted booth capturing.
3. No voting after poll closure: Once the "CLOSE" button is pressed at the end of the polling period, the EVM is immediately locked, preventing any further voting from taking place. This safeguard ensures the integrity of the voting process and eliminates the possibility of unauthorized votes being cast.
4. Quick and error-free counting: EVMs streamline the vote-counting process, ensuring quick, error-free, and mischief-free tabulation of results. Manual counting of paper ballots, in contrast, is often prone to errors and manipulation.
5. Voter verification: With the introduction of Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machines, voters can instantly verify that their vote has been cast correctly by checking the printed slip displaying the name and symbol of the chosen candidate or party. This added layer of transparency further enhances the credibility of the electoral process.
The Controversy and Allegations
Despite the numerous safeguards and advantages of EVMs, opposition parties have consistently raised concerns over their potential vulnerability to hacking or tampering. Some parties have demanded cross-verification of 100 percent of EVM votes with VVPAT slips to rule out any possibility of manipulation.
However, the Election Commission has firmly rejected such claims, stating that EVMs are stand-alone, non-networked devices that have no access to the outside world and cannot be connected to any network or external device. The commission has emphasized that the machines are impervious to external control or manipulation due to their one-time programmable nature and the stringent security protocols in place. Alarmists, and fearmongers share a common trait: they thrive on the public's susceptibility to misinformation about political events and use it to form a crooked narrative that aids their political ambitions.
Therefore, it is of the utmost importance to disseminate comprehensive information to the public, enabling voters to assess the validity of allegations against EVMs whenever opposition parties contest election results. The dissemination of factual information is crucial in combating fear-based narratives and ensuring the integrity of the democratic process.
Forensic Lab Testing and EVM Hackathon Challenge
In 2017, the Bombay High Court ordered an examination of EVMs from the Parvati constituency in Pune following concerns raised during the 2014 Maharashtra legislative assembly elections. One control unit, one ballot unit, and two batteries underwent rigorous scrutiny in a forensic lab. The findings were unequivocal: EVMs are stand-alone, non-networked, and one-time programmable units, impervious to external control or connection to any network. Consequently, the report concluded that no evidence of tampering, alteration, or manipulation could be detected, solidifying trust in the reliability of EVMs for fair and transparent elections.
Additionally, in a bold move to address concerns and demonstrate the incorruptibility of EVMs, the Election Commission invited political parties to participate in an EVM hackathon challenge. Surprisingly, no political party stepped forward to accept the challenge, raising questions about the validity of their claims and potentially undermining their credibility in the public eye. It is worth noting that various political parties, including the Congress, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), Trinamool Congress (TMC), and Left Democratic Front (LDF), have won elections using the same EVMs they now call into question. This paradoxical stance raises eyebrows, as parties rarely question the integrity of EVMs after resounding electoral victories.
The Allure of Conspiracy Theories
In an era where technology permeates every aspect of our lives, it is natural for some individuals to harbor skepticism towards anything electronic or digital.
Why Do Political Parties Question the Use of EVMs?
While the use of EVMs in Indian elections has been a longstanding practice, the heightened scrutiny and allegations from political parties emerged primarily after the 2014 general elections. Prior to 2014, opposition to the use of EVMs was relatively muted. However, the stunning electoral defeats suffered by certain parties since 2014 have led to a shift in their stance, with some attributing their losses to alleged EVM tampering or hacking.
The case of Mayawati's Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) is particularly noteworthy. After the party's ignominious defeat in the 2017 Uttar Pradesh assembly elections, where the BSP secured only 19 seats, Mayawati could not reconcile with the loss of her political moorings. It was in the aftermath of this defeat that allegations of EVM hacking gained traction, with Mayawati being one of the earliest proponents of this narrative. Other parties swiftly adopted this line of reasoning, perhaps as a means to discredit the ruling party's victories or as a preemptive justification for potential losses in future elections. Some analysts argue that these parties are certain of losing elections and are employing the EVM controversy as a convenient scapegoat, preparing the ground for creating unrest and mayhem in the event of unfavorable results. By persistently questioning the integrity of EVMs, they aim to undermine the credibility of the electoral process and cast doubt on the legitimacy of the outcomes.
Conclusion
The controversy surrounding EVMs in India has polarized opinions and sparked heated debates across the political spectrum. While the Election Commission steadfastly defends the integrity and security of these machines, opposition parties continue to raise concerns over their potential vulnerability to tampering or manipulation. As India continues to strengthen its democratic institutions and uphold the principles of free and fair elections, it is crucial to address legitimate concerns while relying on scientific evidence and transparent processes.
The forensic lab testing and the EVM hackathon challenge have provided valuable insights into the reliability of these machines, but more can be done to foster trust and confidence in the electoral process. Ultimately, the credibility of any electoral system hinges on the collective commitment of all stakeholders – political parties, civil society, the media, and the electorate – to uphold the sanctity of the democratic process. By embracing transparency, promoting fact-based discourse, and fostering an environment of mutual respect and cooperation, India can navigate the EVM controversy and emerge stronger, with a renewed faith in the integrity of its electoral system.
Comments