Political parties voicing concern over the credibility of Electronic Voting Machines (EVM) got a moral boost on Thursday after the Supreme Court directed the Centre and the Election Commission to explain by May 8 its position on the feasibility of introducing paper trail system in all voting machines.
Unanimity among Opposition parties was witnessed in the matter as senior advocate P Chidambaram appeared for the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), the lead petitioner in the case along with a separate petition filed by a former Samajwadi Party legislator Ataur Rehman. Even the Congress, represented by the party bigwigs Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, sought permission of the Court to file an application in support of the BSP petition. Senior advocate Kalyan Banerjee, also a Trinamool Congress MP, later informed the Court that his party wished to file an intervention application, thus making it virtually a cross section of Opposition parties which has brought their battle against EVMs to Court.
Chidambaram told the Court that EVMs just like any electronic device was open to manipulation and a stage had come when the apex court’s order of October 8, 2013 directing EC to implement the paper trail system in all EVMs in a phased manner is realised at the earliest. Although BSP even sought cancellation of the recently concluded Assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh, Chidambaram dropped this prayer, restricting the scope of the petition to the implementation of paper trail only.
The Bench of Justices J Chelameswar and S Abdul Nazeer issued notice on the two petitions to Centre and EC asking for their responses by May 8, the next date of hearing in this matter. The Bench said, “EVM itself is supposed to be a remedy for other ills facing the election process such as booth capturing, etc. But with advancement of technology, we have to consider the issue.”
When Sibal too joined the chorus against EVMs pointing out research that except in South America, nowhere in the world, EVMs are in use, the Bench wittingly retorted, “As a matter of fact, this system was introduced when your party (Congress) was in power,” forcing the senior Congressman to say, “Every system has its demerits. We are only addressing our concerns.”
The petitions focused on the October 8, 2013 judgment to seek full implementation of the voter verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) system to be employed across the nearly 13 lakh EVMs presently in use across the country. At the time when the said verdict was pronounced, the apex court allowed EC to phase-wise implement the same. But Chidambaram pointed out that since 2014, EC has shot at least 10 letters to the Ministry of Finance and Prime Minister Office to provide finances to fund VVPAT in all voting machines. To this day, he added, this request was not granted.
According to petitioners, the total cost involved is Rs 3,000 crore, but considering the pace at which VVPAT is being introduced, Chidambaram quoted the EC as saying it may take 150 years for realising this objective. This, he argued, cannot be accepted as voter needs a verifiable proof that his vote validly went to the person he/she voted for. Even the apex court’s 2013 judgment said, “paper trail is an indispensable requirement of free and fair elections. The confidence of the voters in the EVMs can be achieved only with the introduction of the paper trail...With an intent to have fullest transparency in the system and to restore the confidence of the voters, it is necessary to set up EVMs with VVPAT system because vote is nothing but an act of expression which has immense importance in democratic system.”