Saturday, July 20, 2024
HomeHomeVVPAT-EVM Cross-Verification Decision Challenged in Review Petition

VVPAT-EVM Cross-Verification Decision Challenged in Review Petition

Review Petition Challenges Supreme Court’s Decision on VVPAT-EVM Cross-Verification

A petition has been filed for a review of the recent Supreme Court ruling rejecting a plea to cross-verify every Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) slip with votes cast via Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) [Arun Kumar Agarwal vs Election Commission of India and anr].

The petitioner, Arun Kumar Agarwal, argues that there are apparent errors in the April 26 judgment.

“The assertion that tallying EVM votes with VVPAT slips would unreasonably delay results, or require double the manpower, is inaccurate. Existing CCTV surveillance in counting halls would prevent manipulation during VVPAT slip counting,” states the review petition.

Also read: Supreme Court Judgment On EVM-VVPAT Verification

On April 26, Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta’s Bench dismissed the plea for cross-verification while also rejecting a suggestion to revert to paper ballots instead of EVMs.

The Court stressed the importance of fostering trust and collaboration to strengthen democracy while rejecting the plea.

However, it directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) and other authorities to take specific steps to enhance confidence in EVMs. These measures include:

Sealing symbol loading units (SLUs) after the symbol loading process and storing them in strong rooms for 45 days;
Allowing candidates to be present during verification, with the district election officer certifying the authenticity of the burnt memory;
Checking the burnt memory in the micro-controller unit by a team of engineers.
Agarwal argues in the review petition that these measures are inadequate.

“The discussion on SLUs overlooks their vulnerability and the need for audit. The Court failed to consider the possibility of extra bytes in SLU data besides necessary images,” states the review plea.

The petitioner also points out that the April 26 judgment incorrectly states that presently, 5% of VVPAT slips are cross-verified with EVM votes, whereas in reality, only 1.97% are.

“Electronic voting machines do not allow voters to verify their votes accurately. Moreover, they are susceptible to malicious alterations by insiders such as designers, programmers, manufacturers, maintenance technicians, etc.,” the plea further contends.

The review application has been filed through advocate Neha Rathi.

Share your news, articles, deals, columns, or press releases with us! Click the link to submit and join our platform today.

RELATED ARTICLES

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular

Recent Comments