DNA Edit: Blaming EVM tampering | politicians and the art of diversion

Rather than being gracious in defeat and conducting some soul-searching into the reasons, the bogie of electronic voting machine tampering raised by some of those who were rejected by the electorate is a dangerous development. Those who have questioned the mandate include some of the biggest losers in the assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Uttarakhand. It is understandable that Mayawati, Harish Rawat and now Arvind Kejriwal are reeling from the scale of the defeat they have suffered. In the past, some BJP leaders have also raised these fears and then piped down. But to raise allegations about the integrity of the electoral process without any evidence of wrongdoing does not behoove seasoned politicians. 

Mayawati does not need to look any further than the limited appeal of her party beyond certain social groups like the Jatavs and to a lesser extent, Muslims. Rawat contested two seats, evidence of a wavering confidence, and knew he had lost the sympathy factor after the BJP unseated him last year to anti-incumbency sentiment. Kejriwal’s failure to project a chief ministerial candidate and the alleged wooing of Khalistani supporters worked in the Congress’ favour. Rather than subject their own actions to honest introspection and self-criticism, these leaders, who have projected themselves on a higher pedestal over their parties, have sought to deflect doubts over their infallibility to the vulnerability of the EVMs. 

Understandably, in an age of heightened fears over digital security, there are fears that the EVM machines are amenable to tampering. In 2009-10, a Hyderabad-based cyber security expert had joined hands with two US-based academics to demonstrate that an EVM, (which he stole and returned), was vulnerable to insertion of duplicate was vulnerable to physical substitution of parts, malicious coding, and remote manipulation of displays.

However, the Election Commission categorically rejected their contentions and has reiterated its faith in the coding, design and manufacture of the EVMs by the Electronics Corporation of India Limited (ECIL). The Indian EVMs are standalone machines making them less vulnerable to network or operating system threats. Moreover, the EC has repeatedly stressed that there was foolproof security in the storage and transport of the nearly two million EVMs making physical tampering without being caught, virtually impossible.   

The EVM machines are randomly tested in the presence of the representatives of all political parties before the polling is begun in every constituency. Even the judiciary has weighed in by mandating that paper trails (Voter-Verified Paper Audit Trails) be introduced in a phased manner to allow voters to confirm that the EVM has correctly registered their choice. The option of counting the VVPAT is available and, perhaps, may be resorted to in a few select booths to silence these naysayers for ever. Perhaps, the VVPAT system can be refined in future to ensure a second level of automated counting. A return to the paper ballots of yore, as suggested by some of these leaders, is not suited to a country like India with a huge population, and problems of law and order. In the past, elections in many Indian states were rife with allegations of ballot stuffing and booth capturing. The politicians making wild allegations may be looking for a face-saving escape route but the damage they do to the sanctity of the election process is incalculable. In the future, this could lead to chaos, violence and political instability. It is the smooth transfer of power has preserve Indian democracy for 67 years now.