Copyright infringement not intended

Picture Courtesy:  THE HINDU

Context

The Bombay High Court issued a notice to the Maharashtra State Election Commission (SEC) on a petition challenging its decision to conduct local body polls in the State without Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machines.  

What Is VVPAT?

It is an independent verification system attached to an Electronic Voting Machine (EVM). 

• When a voter presses a button on the machine, the VVPAT prints a paper slip showing the chosen candidate’s name and party symbol. 
• The slip appears behind a transparent screen for about seven seconds—before it automatically falls into a sealed box. 
• This paper record serves as a physical backup to the electronic vote.

It was first used in the Noksen Assembly by-election in Nagaland in 2013.  

How the VVPAT System Works?

The EVM setup includes a Ballot Unit (BU) and a Control Unit (CU), with the VVPAT connected to both. 

When a voter makes a selection on the Ballot Unit, the VVPAT prints the corresponding slip and displays it for verification. 

If the slip fails to print or fall, the system detects a “fall error” and the Control Unit doesn’t record the vote—preventing inaccuracies

This process creates a dual record of each vote: one digital and one physical. If disputes arise, election officials can manually count the VVPAT slips to cross-check the electronic tally.  

Ongoing Concerns and Criticisms

High Costs

Introducing VVPATs nationwide required significant investment. The 2019 General Elections alone cost over ₹3,100 crore, with each unit priced at around ₹19,650. (Source: ANI) 

Operational Hurdles

Transporting, storing, and maintaining millions of VVPAT machines alongside EVMs demands enormous logistical effort.  

Limited Verification Sample

Currently, slips from only five polling stations per assembly constituency are manually verified, up from one after the 2019 Supreme Court order. Critics argue that this small sample size is statistically inadequate and call for 100% verification.

Incomplete Voter Verification

Voters can only view the slip but cannot physically handle it, leading some experts to question whether the process truly qualifies as “voter-verified.”

Judicial Intervention

2013: In Subramanian Swamy vs ECI, the Supreme Court declared VVPAT an essential component of free and fair elections.

2019: Court Ordered verification in five random polling stations per assembly segment to enhance confidence in results.

2024: In Association for Democratic Reforms vs ECI, the Court dismissed calls for 100% verification,   directed the ECI to seal and preserve Symbol Loading Units (SLUs) for 45 days post-results and allowed defeated candidates to seek limited verification of microcontroller data 

Way Forward

Technical Upgrades: Improve VVPAT hardware and software to minimize errors and adapt machines for local and multi-member elections.

Clear Audit Protocols: Define statistically sound audit standards and transparent procedures for handling disputes or mismatches.

Public Awareness: Increase voter education on how VVPAT works and how it safeguards their votes. Greater understanding can counter misinformation and build public trust.

Regular Review: Periodic evaluation by independent technical experts can ensure that both EVMs and VVPATs remain secure, reliable, and up to date.

Conclusion

VVPATs uphold electoral transparency, bridging technology and accountability by providing voters tangible proof. Future improvements in technical, procedural, and legal aspects, along with innovation, judicial oversight, and voter engagement, will ensure modern and trustworthy elections.

Source: THE HINDU