Baseless charges against use of EVMs

In early 1997 when I was the Chief Election Commissioner of India, the CAG raised a criticism against the ECI. In about 1977, Electronics Corporation of India Ltd was asked by the GOI to develop an Electronic Voting Machine (EVM). Subsequently, Bharat Electronics Ltd was also involved in this effort. Machines worth about Rs 75 crore were manufactured to an Indian design.

In 1982, they were tried at 50 polling booths in Kerala. Legal challenges arose and further efforts to use the machines were given up. Later, they were tried in a few small constituencies in Sikkim. It seems the political parties and the EC did not have the desire or the will to push this great idea forward.

The CAG in 1997 criticised the EC for letting this money go waste. I was not willing to accept this criticism of the Commission. We examined the problem, and decided to go forward, using the EVMs in selected constituencies in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Delhi. I personally went to Jaipur, where we put the machines in the Market Square, and asked housewives coming for shopping to try them.

All of them told me shyly that they liked them. A Madhya Pradesh minister telephoned me, saying that we should not put the machines in villages, as illiterate people would not be able to use them. I said the machine is friendly and neutral to both literate and illiterate. After all, even in the paper vote, we have the name, the party symbol and the box for putting a cross mark.

The machine has the same, except that instead of marking across we press a button. We used the EVMs in that historic November 1997 election in these three States. The test was a great success. After that I pushed the EVM use to the State level. People were happy everywhere. I remember the Delhi election. Sahib Singh Verma was the CM.

The BJP lost badly and Shiela Dikshit came in for the first time, but the BJP did not object even to one polling station result. That was a test of fairness. Political parties had begun to see the fairness of this remarkable machine. No boxes to be stolen, no ink to be poured into the boxes, no spoilt votes. Rapid counting and results by midday.

I saw that the EVM had removed all the quarrels, accusations and tensions of Indian elections. This was the miracle of this new technology. I had conducted paper elections as a young Collector. Nobody accepted the results. Counting continued for days and days. Sheshan, my predecessor, took a week, in continuous mixing, re-bundling, and physical counting. Officers were kept locked in for days and days.

How many complaints I heard in those days. We rapidly expanded the EVMs use, quickly moving to whole States, and many States together on a single day’s polling. It is natural for losers to have doubts and launch challenges. Before introducing the machines, I had held meetings with all the 52 recognised political parties, accepting their suggestions and ideas.

Some leading political figures wanted machines in their constituencies. I was happy to oblige. But when the worthies lost, they complained. The complaints were on two fronts. First the technology could be fiddled with. I invited the losers, called the MDs and engineers of the ECIL and BEL and cleared their doubts. The second was invariably a legal challenge.

The late Jayalalithaa challenged the EC in the Madras High Court, Chief Justice Bench. After a long and full hearing, the challenge was dismissed. Incidentally some time later, Jayalalithaa asked me if I was annoyed at her challenge. I answered, no, after all if the Commission lectures the country, the citizens too have the right to challenge us. In later years, challenges had been made in the Karnataka, Delhi and Kerala High Courts. Perhaps elsewhere. All have lost the argument against the EVMs.

The courts have gone to great length to ensure that the Indian citizen is not cheated by the EVM. The system settled down and became the envy of the world. As CEC, I was shown a Canadian machine; they thought I would buy. I told them your machine is too expensive, and too complicated even for your citizens. Our machine – great credit to ECIL and BEL – is inexpensive, simple to use and robust.

It can’t be easily damaged. We carry it to high mountains and the desert on camels and elephants, across rivers. It has never failed and the world knows it. What is more the world admires India for this achievement. Don’t knock it. Twenty years have passed since the EVMs first use in November 1997. We have held untold State elections and many Parliamentary ones.

All parties have won and lost, and the habit of complaining on a loss, had almost disappeared, till this current controversy. In August 2009, the Commission once again invited one and all, to demonstrate the flaws of the machine, if any. No one won the ‘Swayamvar.’ I am surprised at the current broad and vague accusations.

I find that the present challenge is from those who lost heavily in the UP. Some others fearing a loss in the coming city elections, are perhaps doing a ’Peshbandi.’ I think accusations against this remarkable national improvement of the election system, should not be casually and lightly made.

However, we are a democracy and if any questions are raised legally or technically, the EC must respond. I am sure the Commission will be only too happy, to respond to any legal challenge, in order to remove any doubt. If anyone can bring up a credible technical question, this too the Commission will happily examine. This has always been the policy and practice of the Election Commission of India. (Writer is Former Chief Election Commissioner of India)

By DRMANOHAR SINGH GILL