Order reserved on Swamy’s plea on voting machines
New Delhi, Jan 10 (IANS) The Delhi High Court Tuesday reserved its order on a plea filed by Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy that the electronic voting machines (EVMs) were not tamper-free and needed rectification to ensure free and fair elections.
In his petition, Swamy said that the EVMs should be of international standard and needed rectification.Swamy submitted that either paper printouts should be incorporated in the EVMs or the Election Commission should return to the ballot paper system to avoid tampering at the time of polls.
‘The Election Commission should at least provide paper receipts of the votes cast for the voter to verify. This move would ensure that a vote cast is secured and the election is not rigged,’ Swamy said before the division bench of Acting Chief Justice A.K. Sikri and Justice R.S. Endlaw.
Swamy contended that in the poll process, transparency had to be given priority over efficiency.He explained that EVMs’ electronic database was chip controlled and that was not tamper proof. He also cited examples of technologically advanced European nations which don’t use EVMs for the same reason.
He said electronic voting machines offered a lot of benefits but suggested nine safeguards to protect them from tampering.
Welcome to Haindava Keralam! Register for Free or Login as a privileged HK member to enjoy auto-approval of your comments and to receive periodic updates.
Latest Articles from Bharath Focus
- Narendra Modi: The Architect of India’s Momentous Transformation
- Republic Day Tableaux & Regional Pride
- Tarun Vijay meets Governor Arif Khan on Adi Sankara birthplace
- SC-ST പോസ്റ്റ് മെട്രിക് സ്കോളർഷിപ്പിൽ 5 ഇരട്ടി വർദ്ധനവ്
- Treading the Middle-Path on Temple Management
- Taming the dragon-Part-3
- Taming the dragon- Part 2
- India- China trade wars on the cards? Well researched blog on Indian govt.’s proposed plan to tax 371 Chinese goods
- Before removing the idols, I should be removed; Two Kerala faces we should never forget
- The Unseen Unheard Victims of Article 35(A)
Responses