The Supreme Court Tells Prashant Bhushan in the VVPAT Case, “We Can’t Control Polls”
As per today’s ruling, the Supreme Court cannot govern how the Election Commission, a constitutional entity, operates and is not the supreme authority over elections. These statements were made at the hearing on petitions requesting a comprehensive cross-verification of votes cast on electronic voting machines (EVMs) with paper slips produced by the VVPAT system. The verdict is currently on hold at the court. Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, the bench, questioned the authority of acting based just on suspicion. “If you are predisposed about a thought-process, then we cannot help you… we are not here to change your thought process,” the court stated in response to concerns voiced by Advocate Prashant Bhushan, speaking on behalf of the petitioner Association for Democratic Reforms.
Concerning the EVM voting technology, the petitions ask for a directive to double-check each vote cast on an EVM with the paper slips produced by the VVPAT system. At the moment, five randomly chosen EVMs from each Assembly constituency are subject to this cross-verification. The petitioners brought up the topic of public trust during the previous sessions and made analogies to European nations that have returned to using ballots for voting. The court rejected these parallels, noting that the difficulties at hand are distinct. The Election Commission emphasized that the current method is secure.
Both a control and a balloting unit are present in an EVM. There is a cable between these. Additionally, a Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machine is attached to these. A voter can use this machine to check whether their vote was correctly cast and got to the politician they favor. The court asked the poll organization for clarifications this morning as the proceedings got underway regarding the system’s microcontrollers and whether or not they could be reprogrammed. In response, the Election Commission stated that each of the three units had a microcontroller that can only be programmed once. Mr. Bhushan argued that these microcontrollers contain reprogrammable flash memory. It is inaccurate to claim that it cannot be reprogrammed, he said.
The poll body’s technical report must be believed, the court ruled. “According to them, flash memory has a very low quantum. 1024 symbols, not software, can be stored by them. It is said to be agnostic with regard to the microcontrollers in the control unit. According to Justice Khanna, it recognizes the buttons but does not recognize the party or emblem. When Mr. Bhushan questioned whether a harmful program could be loaded into the flash memory, the court said, “Can we issue a mandamus on the basis of a suspicion?” We cannot control the elections because we are not another constitutional authority’s controlling body.
