Surpassing the suspicion on EVM
The EVM debate is back. There is nothing fresh about it: the context, the arguments, the debaters. Unfortunately, it is not clear how this dispute can be settled or even debated meaningfully. Fortunately, there is a way to bury this unending dispute. We must move there — quickly — if we wish to save the only element in our democratic system that retains some credence.
The INDIA coalition’s latest meet has brought this back. A unanimous resolution, oddly the only resolution passed in the much-awaited summit meet, limited itself to saying that “there are many doubts on the integrity of the functioning of the EVMs. These have been raised by many experts and professionals as well.” Instead of demanding a roll back to ballot paper, they make a different suggestion now: “Our suggestion is simple: Instead of the voter-verified paper audit trail (VVPAT) slip falling in the box, it should be handed over to the voter who shall then place it in a separate ballot box after having verified his or her choice. 100% counting of VVPAT slips should then be done.” This, they said, will restore full confidence of the people in free and fair elections.
Before I proceed with the argument a full disclosure is in order. In a political world sharply polarized between EVM skeptics and EVM Believers I have remained in the second camp. I have spent some academic and considerable social energy in disbelieving the accusation that the outcome of major elections during the last decade and half have been manipulated. I opposed the idea when Mamata Banerjee blamed EVMS for her debate, when BJP leaders (including their spokesperson now, GVL Narsimha Rao) wrote a book against EVMs and when Congress camp followers said EVMs were responsible for their defeat in 2014 and 2019. As you can imagine, this stubborn insistence has not earned me many friends in my political community.
The suspicion against the EVMs is based on three assumptions, each of which makes sense. First, there is a distrust of the machine: any electronic gadget can be programmed and manipulated. The more sophisticated the machine, the higher the probability. Second, the suspicion is accentuated by political distrust of the current regime. Not even the most gullible political animal would accuse the top two leaders – the only ones who matter today — of moral qualms. Just play this thought experiment in your mind: If someone told them that there is a safe and reliable way to hack the machines, would they refuse on moral grounds to take this advantage? Finally, there is an institutional distrust which turns this suspicion into a full-blown conspiracy theory. Sadly, the rapid erosion in the autonomy and the authority of the Election Commission has meant that no one entertains the illusion that the EC might resist any illegitimate demand by the ruling dispensation. It is easy to believe that the EC would collude with the regime.
Yet this debate cannot be allowed to fester. Our democratic institutions and processes are fast eroding. Elections are nowhere close to a level playing ground, with the ruling party enjoying a massive unfair advantage. The only fair element in the democratic process is the act of voting and counting. That last element is at stake in this debate.
My point is that these three valid assumptions only prove that the EVM manipulation is a real possibility. But it does not prove that it has happened in a given election. Much less that it has happened at a scale to alter the overall outcome of the electoral verdict. Over the years, I have asked for some evidence – not hardcore forensic evidence admissible in a court of law but some prima facie evidence — but have not come across something that can pass a test of reasonable suspicion.
The recent election to Madhya Pradesh assembly is a case in point. The outcome was counter-intuitive. No political observer, journalist or opinion poll (barring one exit poll) anticipated a BJP victory by around 9 percentage points. I travelled extensively in the state and could not sense any wave. I must confess that I could not believe the results; I still feel something is fishy about these numbers. Yet that can hardly count as evidence against the EVMs. The Congress pointed out that there was a mismatch between postal ballots and EVM vote count. Odd but not unprecedented. There is something strange about the decline in the vote share for smaller parties and independents and the unbelievable rise of the BJP by about the same quantum of vote share. Strange but not impossible.
That is the problem in this debate. Those who believe in EVM count demand evidence of actual manipulation that is hard to come by. The EVM skeptics expect a fool proof demonstration of technical inviolability, something that the Election Commission has not offered, perhaps cannot offer.
Yet this debate cannot be allowed to fester. Our democratic institutions and processes are fast eroding. Elections are nowhere close to a level playing ground, with the ruling party enjoying a massive unfair advantage. The only fair element in the democratic process is the act of voting and counting. That last element is at stake in this debate.
So here is a proposal for the Election Commission to consider. This does not require going back to the ballot paper, which can introduce more problems than it would solve. And it does not involve handing over the VVPAT slip to the voter, as demanded by the opposition. That needs careful thinking, but is not possible at least in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. Instead the commission can take the following four steps to build public confidence in the electoral outcome. One, the Commission should place in the public domain the source code of the software being used for the Control Unit, the VVPAT and the Symbol Loading Unit and allow representatives of political parties to verify its authenticity at the time of elections. Two, allow technical experts deputed by all national and state recognised political parties to verify the claim that the EVMs are “Stand Alone” devices that cannot be connected, physically or virtually, to any other device after the announcement of elections. Three, order that the randomized allotment of EVMs to the specific polling booths be done (by a draw of lot in the presence of the representatives of the candidates) after the loading of symbols and commissioning of EVMs. Fourth, and most important of all, declare the final result after all the votes as verified by the voters and recorded in the VVPAT slips are counted and matched with the electronic count. If there is a mismatch, as per Conduct of Election Rules 56D (4) (d), the count of VVPAT slips prevails.
This would lead to a delay of a few hours in the count and declaration of result. But let us not forget that elections are not T-20 cricket.