SC to deliver verdict on pleas seeking 100% EVM-VVPAT verification tomorrow

The Supreme Court is all set to deliver its verdict on a batch of petitions demanding 100 percent verification of votes cast on Electronic Voting Machines (EVM) with Voter Verified Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs). The judgement will be delivered at 10:30 am on Friday.

There will be two judgments in the EVM-VVPAT case – one by Justice Sanjiv Khanna and the other by Justice Dipankar Datta.

On April 18, the Supreme Court had reserved its judgment on a batch of petitions filed by Association for Democratic Rights (ADR) and others. The court also listed the petitions again on April 24 to seek certain technical clarifications from the Election Commission of India (ECI).

During the hearing, the bench had extensively interacted with an Election Commission official to understand the workings of the EVMs and VVPATs and their security features, Live Law reported. 

What the pleas sought?

The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) is one of the petitioners who sought a reversal of the Election Commission's 2017 decision to replace the transparent glass on VVPAT machines with an opaque glass through which a voter can see the slip only when the light is on for seven seconds.

The ADR sought to match the count in EVMs with votes that have been verifiably "recorded as cast" and to ensure the voter is able to verify through the VVPAT slip that his vote, as recorded on the paper slip, has been "counted as recorded".

What SC has said so far?

The Election Commission asserted that the EVMs cannot be tampered with under any circumstance and that the complete counting of the VVPAT slips was not practically feasible, Live Law reported.

During the hearing, Supreme Court judge Datta pointed out to advocate Prashant Bhushan that no incidence of malicious program loading with the symbol had been reported. “Out of the 5 percent VVPATs counted, any candidate can show if there is any mismatch," Justice Datta queried.

“Till date there is no report of any such incident (malicious program being loaded along with the symbol). We cannot control the election Mr Bhushan, we cannot control another constitutional authority," Justice Datta said.

Justice Khanna reassured, "If there is room for improvement, we can certainly enhance it. The courts intervened twice: first, when we mandated the use of VVPAT, and second, when we increased the verification from one to five percent." 

The Supreme Court also emphasized earlier that whenever suggestions were sought to enhance the voting process, the submissions consistently advocated for a return to ballot papers’.