The EVM controversy is back in the news after Congress leader called the EVM a ‘black box’ saying ‘serious concerns’ stemmed from the fact that ‘nobody was allowed to scrutinise the EVMs’ while calling for accountability from institutions to save democracy from being reduced to a sham and being prone to fraud.
Fresh concerns arose after a report claimed that a member of the Shinde Sena group was in possession of a mobile phone that would receive an OTP that could be used to unlock the EVM machine.
The Election Commission of India has since clarified that there is no such OTP that is required to open EVM machines and that EVMs being completely standalone machines that are not connected to any network could not have needed OTPs to unlock them. US billionaire Elon Musk too waded in the controversy which prompted former Union Minister Rajeev Chandreshekar to hit back claiming that EVM machines in India are different from those in the US and are not networked in any way. But the controversy refuses to die down.
Part of the reason is because of how the Election Commission of India has handled questions concerning the EVMs. When EVMs were first introduced the ECI of the time went out of its way to explain to the public how safe and secure the EVMs were. Explaining that it isn’t just the machine itself that isn’t hackable since it would mean gaining physical access to the machines -- that that the process itself was such that no unauthorised person would have access to the machines.
Over the years as the EVMs gradually grew in acceptability, the Election Commission of India, instead of being open and transparent concerning the machines, has grown reserved, defensive and secretive about the EVMs shooting down questions with snark, hitting back at questions not just about “hacking” but also about differences in vote count, booth capturing, EVM swapping as well as the security of the process right from manufacturing, which is done by private players right to their use, and apparent unauthorised access to EVMs as reported in the media.
This attitude has only served to promote suspicion about the use of EVMs and has promoted questions across social media and a general atmosphere of doubt which the Election Commission of India has failed to address.
It’s not only hacking that the people are suspicious of. It is a known fact that EVMs are prone to malfunction. Being machines the public needs to be reassured that even an unintended malfunction does not compromise the integrity of the process. The best way to counter doubt and suspicion is to open the darkness to sunshine and allow independent experts.
Examination by independent experts will not only reassure the public that the EVMs are indeed unhackable, but that there are no logical errors or hardware deficiencies that make the EVMs vulnerable.
Instead, the Election Commission of India appears to be more worried about protecting its own reputation, which is ironically being destroyed by the very attitude that seeks to absolve itself of any accountability.
The effectiveness of the EVMs is not just in whether the machines and the systems are effective and robust, but also whether people trust that they are effective and robust. Anything short of that will dent not just people’s faith in the system, but also dent India’s standing as a democracy that is open, transparent and isn’t hesitant to have its practices scrutinized.
