Supreme Court Judgement on EVMs

Control Unit

Balloting Unit

• It is kept with the Presiding Officer or a Polling Officer.
• The Polling Officer is in charge of the Control Unit presses the Ballot button on the Control Unit to release the ballot for the voter.
• It can store the memory in its unit for 10 years or even more.

• It is placed inside the voting compartment, one balloting unit is designed for 16 candidates.
• It is connected to Control Unit through 5 metre cable.
• Once the ballot is released it enables the voter to cast their vote by pressing the ‘Candidate’ button (blue button) on the Balloting Unit against the candidate and symbol of their choice.

Key aspect

Petitioner’s demand

Supreme Court’s verdict

Full cross verification

• The petitioner argued that every voter should be able to verify that their vote has been counted properly after receiving confirmation that it has been cast.
• Currently, VVPAT slips are counted and matched with the EVM tally only in five randomly selected polling booths per constituency.

• The court rejected this, stating that while voters have the right to know their vote has been recorded accurately, it doesn't equate to the right of 100% counting of VVPAT slips.
•  The court emphasized that other measures like the seven-second display of VVPAT slips and the ability to approach the Presiding Officer in case of mismatches as per Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 already protects voter’s right adequately.

Tampering with EVMs

• As per report by the Citizens’ Commission on Elections the petitioner argued there is a possibility of EVMs being tampered with or hacked.
• The commission is chaired by former Supreme Court judge Justice Madan B Lokur.

• The court dismissed these concerns as unfounded, citing the unalterable nature of the microcontroller used in EVMs.
• The court directed additional measures to strengthen the integrity of the election process, such as checking the microcontroller for tampering upon request and sealing Symbol Loading Units (SLUs) along with EVMs for 45 days after results are declared.

EVM- VVPAT discrepancy

• The petitioner submitted that the ECI had acknowledged instances of variance in the results captured by the EVM and VVPAT.
• Example- 2019 elections in the Mydukur Assembly seat, Andhra Pradesh the EVM recorded 14 more votes than the VVPAT.
• This was later clarified by the Returning Officer as an oversight where a mock poll had not been cleared from the EVM.

• The court held that aside from one case in Mydukur there was not a single case of mismatch or defect in the recording of votes in any EVMs that are checked.
• This assertion was supported by data showing that even in 26 instances where voters reported mismatches, no actual discrepancies were found upon verification.

Giving VVPAT slip to voter

• The petitioners argue that the current system, which allows voters to view the VVPAT slip for only seven seconds, could be susceptible to manipulation.
• They suggest that the machine could be programmed to not cut the slip, preventing it from being counted, and propose that the slip should instead be handed to the voter to place in a ballot box.

• The court said that the purpose of the tinted glass above the VVPAT slip is to maintain the secrecy of the vote while still allowing the voter to verify their vote for seven seconds.
• The glass also serves to protect the slip from damage or tampering.
• The court reasoned that giving voters physical access to the VVPAT slips could lead to potential misuse, malpractices and disputes.

Return to paper ballot

• The petitioner suggested this move, referencing countries like Germany that have returned to paper ballots.
• They also proposed the idea of adding barcodes to VVPAT slips to facilitate the use of counting machines and minimize delays in vote counting.

• The court countered this suggestion by highlighting the benefits of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs), which include preventing booth capturing, eliminating invalid votes, offering administrative convenience, and reducing the use of paper.
• The court did not provide an opinion on the barcode suggestion, stating that it is a technical matter for the ECI to decide.

Symbol Loading Unit

• It is a device used in the preparation of EVMs with Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) for elections.
• Loading candidates symbol- Before an election, the list of contesting candidates and their symbols needs to be loaded onto the VVPAT machines through SLU a small device about the size of a matchbox.
• Loading procedure- The SLU is connected to a laptop or personal computer, where a symbol loading application is used to load a bitmap file containing the candidates' names, serial numbers, and symbols, this file is then transferred to the SLU.
• Transferring to VVPAT- Once the symbols are loaded onto the SLU, it is connected to the VVPAT machine. The loaded symbols are then transferred from the SLU to the VVPAT, ensuring that each VVPAT contains the correct symbols corresponding to the candidates.
• Supervision -The process of loading symbols onto VVPATs via SLUs is conducted under the supervision of a district election officer to maintain transparency and integrity.
• Utility- The SLU is used only a few days before polling in a particular seat, and after the symbols are loaded onto the VVPATs, the SLU is no longer relevant to the voting process.
• It is then handed over to the district election officer for safekeeping until the end of the election.
• Recent directive- The Supreme Court requires the Election Commission of India (ECI) to seal and secure SLUs for 45 days after the declaration of election results.
• Verification- This ensures that SLUs used in the election process can be examined along with EVMs if there are challenges to the election results.