​A crisis of trust: On the Election Commission of India

The credibility of an electoral system, or democracy in general, is dependent solely on it being seen as fair by all, particularly so by the loser. This is comparable to a judicial dispute or a sporting event on this count. If the losers think they lost only because the process was rigged against them, a crisis of trust develops. The serious charges being raised against the Election Commission of India (ECI) by the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, has to be seen in this context. He says that he has plans to disclose more information regarding discrepancies in the 2024 general election. One must wait for the details of those allegations before making any comments on their merits. The ECI has come under attack by politicians earlier too. Narendra Modi, when he was the Chief Minister of Gujarat, had repeatedly questioned the impartiality of the ECI. Many of these charges against the ECI are rhetorical attempts by political parties or leaders to animate supporters. In Bihar, the Leader of Opposition in the State Assembly, Tejashwi Yadav, has alleged his name did not exist on the draft electoral roll which is being revised by the ECI. As it turns out the Elector’s Photo Identity Card (EPIC) number that he thought was his is different from the one in the ECI records, raising a new controversy. Politicians should be raising questions about the electoral process only when there are strong grounds for doing so. Trust in the electoral system is foundational to representative democracy.

That said, the ECI’s recent statements and actions, far from buttressing public trust and enhancing transparency in the process, raise more questions. Its efficiency and its neutrality are on test in the preparation of rolls, scheduling of elections, enforcement of the code of conduct, counting process, and the redress of complaints. The ECI stands charged on each of these counts. Other than protesting that the electronic voting machines (EVM) are beyond tampering, and that political parties should raise objections regarding rolls at the appropriate time, the ECI has refused to come clean on multiple issues. It has not been transparent about the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machine which is one of the three parts that make an Electronic Voting Machine. Unlike the other two parts — the Ballot Unit and the Control Unit — the VVPAT has software that is centrally installed and it is connected to the control unit. The random tallying of the VVPAT with the electronically cast votes is now an extremely arbitrary process. All political parties do not have the equal capacity to monitor the various stages of the electoral process. At any rate, the election process is not a matter of negotiation between parties and the ECI. Political parties have a role to play, but the real question is to ensure that the citizenry at large is reassured of the integrity of the electoral process. The ECI needs to correct its course to ensure that.