Supreme Court dismissed doubts about hacking and manipulation of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs), termed pleas for return to the paper ballot system as “foible and unsound” and rejected the prayer for giving voters physical access to VVPAT slips, and for 100% counting of paper slips.
The court was unequivocal in attesting to the integrity of EVMs, saying the possibility of hacking or tampering was unfounded. “...The suspicion that EVMs can be configured/manipulated for repeated or wrong recording of vote(s) to favour a particular candidate should be rejected,” it said.
A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, however, passed directions to further strengthen the integrity of the system and said like EVMs, symbol loading units shall be sealed and secured after symbols have been loaded in VVPAT (Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail) machines.
It also granted an option to the runner-up and the candidate finishing third to get burnt memory/microcontroller in 5% of EVMs - control unit, ballot unit and VVPAT unit - per assembly constituency/assembly segment of a parliamentary constituency checked and verified after the announcement of results for any tampering.
The verdict marked a big blow to the high-wattage campaign against EVMs, especially since 2014 when BJP under Narendra Modi pulled off a stunning victory. The SC examined threadbare the administrative and technical safeguards in EVMs and concluded that there was no substance in the allegations. “Repeated and persistent doubts and despair, even without supporting evidence, can have contrarian impact of creating distrust. This can reduce citizen participation and confidence in elections, essential for a healthy and robust democracy. Unfounded challenges may actually reveal perceptions and predispositions, whereas this court, as an arbiter and adjudicator of disputes and challenges, must render decisions on facts based on evidence and data,” the bench said.
Noting that the micro controller used in EVM had one time programmable memory and was unalterable once burned, the bench said, “To us, it is apparent that a number of safeguards and protocols with stringent checks have been put in place. Data and figures do not indicate artifice and deceit. Reprogramming by flashing, even if we assume is remotely possible, is inhibited by the strict control and checks put in place.”
