Ensuring Fairness in Elections: The Role of VVPAT Machines

Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) correctly dismissed a review petition seeking 50 VVPAT (Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail) verification booths. This decision has sparked debate regarding the importance of VVPAT usage and the transparency of electoral processes.

The Supreme Court's Decision

The Supreme Court's rejection of the review petition is a reaffirmation of its commitment to maintaining the integrity of elections. Disgruntled litigants and chronic litigants often resort to such revisions as it costs less than the original application. However, the SC's decision underscores the thoroughness with which such matters are handled. Elections are the gates of democracy, ensuring that co-existence of different human lives, values, cultures, and faiths can thrive. Holding elections in a free, fair, and transparent manner is paramount.

The Context of VVPAT Machines

The VVPAT machines, introduced on a test basis during the 2013 Assembly Elections, were a result of a Supreme Court directive in response to a challenge made by Subramanium Swamy. Swamy had questioned the fairness of elections conducted using Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs), citing the possibility of EVM manipulation or malfunction. As a direct result of this concern, VVPAT machines were introduced. While the aim was to ensure transparency, these machines have faced issues of their own.

Challenges and Mitigations

Since 2013, VVPAT machines have been used in various elections, with reports of malfunctioning or incorrect vote recording in several places. The possibility of such issues leads to a presumption of incorrect counting in case of such mishaps. The 2019 Parliamentary Elections were the first to see nearly all constituencies using VVPAT machines, a step towards ensuring greater transparency. However, the current practice is limited to only 5 booths per assembly segment, a number that the opposition parties believe is insufficient, demanding 25 booths.

The number of VVPAT booths should not be the sole criterion for ensuring fairness. Instead, the true essence lies in the decision-maker's discretion. The fewer VVPAT booths used, the higher the likelihood of manipulation. The fairness of elections is directly proportional to the number of VVPAT slip matches. Therefore, to fully ensure fairness, the Election Commission should aim to match 100% of the votes polled.

Conclusion

This article invites readers to reflect on the importance of VVPAT machines and the need for greater transparency in electoral processes. The Supreme Court's decision is a testament to its commitment to maintaining the integrity of elections. It is crucial that the Election Commission continues to evolve its policies to further enhance the transparency and fairness of elections.

As always, the views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official stance of the Supreme Court or any other organization.