VVPAT Controversy: Amid the voting for the second phase of the Lok Sabha elections (Lok Sabha Elections 2024), the Supreme Court heard the VVPAT case on Thursday. The court has dismissed the petitions related to conducting elections with ballot paper and 100% cross-checking of Electronic Voting Machines (EVM) and VVPAT slips. Along with this, the court has issued a notice to the Central Government and the Election Commission regarding VVPAT and sought a reply. Let us know what is VVPAT and why is there a controversy about it? What did the Supreme Court say while dismissing the petitions related to VVPAT?
Table of Contents
What is VVPAT?
The full form of VVPAT is Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail. This is a vote verification system. It shows whether the vote has been cast correctly or not. EVM has a ballot unit, a control unit and a VVPAT. The total cost of EVM includes Rs 7900 per ballot unit, Rs 9800 per control unit and Rs 16000 per VVPAT.
Who manufactures VVPAT?
VVPAT, ballot unit and control unit are manufactured by two public sector companies, Electronics Corporation of India Limited and Bharat Electronics Limited.
When was it used for the first time?
To increase transparency and credibility in the election process, the Conduct of Election Rules 1961 were amended in 2013 to allow the use of VVPAT machines. They were used for the first time in the by-election (2013) for the Noksen assembly seat in Nagaland.
How does VVPAT work?
For more transparency in elections, since 2019, VVPAT slips from 5 polling stations in each assembly constituency are matched with the votes cast in EVM. No discrepancy has been found so far. Voters vote for a candidate through ballot unit, they can see a slip on the VVPAT unit for 7 seconds, which has the symbol of the party of the said candidate. Since India has a secret voting system, voters cannot take the VVPAT slip home.
When did VVPAT come into controversy?
VVPAT came into controversy before the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. Then the leaders of 21 opposition parties had demanded that votes be matched with the slips of at least 50 percent of VVPAT machines out of all EVMs. Earlier, the Election Commission used to match only one EVM with the VVPAT machine in every constituency. After this, many technocrats had raised questions on the credibility of VVPAT.
How many petitions were filed in SC?
Some technocrats had filed petitions demanding verification of all EVMs through VVPAT. Apart from this, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) had also filed a petition for matching of votes in July 2023. The apex court has rejected the petitions requesting 100 percent matching of votes cast through EVM with VVPAT slips.
What did the Supreme Court say?
A bench of Justices Sanjeev Khanna and Dipankar Dutta of the Supreme Court delivered two separate concurring judgments in the case. All the petitions related to this case were dismissed, including the petition requesting re-election with ballot papers.
What instructions did the court give?
In his decision, Justice Khanna directed the Election Commission to secure the store units used to load symbols in the electronic voting machines in a ‘strong room’ for 45 days after the voting. Since any person can file an election petition in the High Court challenging the election within 45 days of the declaration of the result, the EVMs and slips are kept safe for 45 days so that the records can be made available when the court asks for them.
The appeal for verification of ‘micro controller’ has to be made within 7 days
The apex court allowed the engineers of EVM manufacturers to verify the ‘micro controller’ of the machine on the request of the second and third placed candidates after the results are declared. The Supreme Court said that the appeal for verification of ‘micro controller’ can be made within seven days of the results being declared, but for this a fee has to be paid first.
The bench said, “If during verification it is found that the EVM has been tampered with, the fee paid by the candidate will be refunded.”
