|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
| << March21, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net]NBC Press Note |
March21, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net] Indian Tax payer and the Pravasi Bharatiya Diwas >> |
|
An Open Letter to the Election Commission, India Dear friends, I am considering sending the following ???Open Letter??? to the Election Commission. Please take a look and give constructive advice at satichou@y.... Thank you very much, Regards, Satinath Choudhary =============================== An Open Letter to the Election Commission, India 19th March 2004 To The Election Commission India Dear Sirs, I am a concerned citizen of India, worried that the electronic voting machines (EVMs) may simplify hijacking of the upcoming election. Thanks to the cooperation of a number of individuals from the Election Commission, I have become familiar with the electronic voting system that is planned to be used. Allow me let you know that I have taught computer science in the USA for many years. So I am fully aware of what computer chips, used in the EVMs can do. Some of my original apprehensions about the machines, arising out of ignorance of the same have been eradicated. However, the more serious ones continue to worry me. Briefly speaking, they are: 1. Supervision of various stages of election by various individuals. 2. Tampering with the machine before the poll. 3. Tampering with the machine after the poll. These concerns and solutions are elaborated below: 1. Supervision of various stages of election by various individuals. We have three Election Commissioners towards better transparency and accountability. Why not extend the same ???triad??? principle for all decision makers all the way down to the lowest level of control ??“ Presiding Officers at various polling booths? Here one more thing may be noted. Politics in India has reduced to a power struggle between the Upper Caste Hindus (UCH ??“ 15%) who hate quota system, and the rest (85% of the population, called Bahujans by some groups), including SC, ST, OBC, Muslims, and Christians, who stand to gain from quota system. So basically the political struggle is between pro-reservation and anti-reservation communities. We know that you are not in a position to enforce fair distribution (15 ??“ 85) of decision makers between these two segments of the society. However, in fairness to the sizes of the above mentioned two groups, among the trio of decision makers at all levels you should insure that two of them come from the Bahujans, while one of the positions may go UCH community. Such a policy by you may possibly result in revolutionary changes in the rest of the governing structures of the society. 2. Tampering with the machine before the poll. The computer chips that control the control units of the voting system can easily be programmed to do all kinds of mischievous things like after a certain number of people have voted, the rest of the votes may get added to a chosen candidate. One can imagine other mischief, but the one sited above is enough to make the point I am trying to make. The kind of mischief I have mentioned cannot be detected by casting a few votes in the beginning of polling and verifying correct counts for various candidates. It will take hundreds of votes, involving hundreds of minutes, which the Presiding Officers and polling agents would not have at their disposal. We understand that the manufacturers check the machines before serial number of various candidates running from a constituency is known. The machines are then put under the control of ROs (Returning Officers), and it stays under the control of ROs for about two weeks before the poll dates. During those two weeks if the ROs choose to play mischievous roles, they have all the opportunities at their disposal, with the help of suitable technical hands, notwithstanding the poor constables guarding the machines. To minimize the opportunity for wicked plays on the part of some wayward ORs, the following need to done: The serial number of the candidates on the ballot list should be random, rather than in alphabetical order, with the final assignment done by lottery draws not more than a day or two before polling. After the serial numbers have been assigned to candidates, a single individual should never be in charge of the machines at any time ??“ it should always be handled or be under supervision of a triad of the kind discussed above. 3. Tampering with the machine after the poll. Best way to reduce chances of tampering after the poll is to eliminate the time interval after the poll closure and reading the machines for the vote counts of various candidates. Reading the control units, at the polling booths themselves, right after poll closure can easily do this. However, if election is held in different phases, as presently planned, reading the control boxes right after poll closures would declare partial results with the passes of different phases. From mid-1980s this has been avoided with the thinking that results of the initial phases may be affecting the results of the later phases. So to enable reading of machines right after poll closures, as is commonly done in the West, we must hold election all over the country on one and the same day, else allow for partial disclosures of the result as different phases are finished. It seems that either of these two possibilities is far better than holding poll in different phases and then reading the machines at the end of all phases. The only for not holding one & the same day election appears to be difficulty in arranging for adequate security on the same day all over the country. However, single-phase election eliminates the problems associated with safe transportation of the voting control modules and their safekeeping, saving us many security personnel and transportation resources. This saving of personnel and resources should be considered while judging single phase voting. It seems that if RPF, army, navy and the air-force personnel, leaving aside those in the border and other sensitive areas, are mobilized, enough security people will be available for single-phase election. All of the earlier phases of voting can be moved over to the last scheduled phase, giving only relief rather than aggravation to various parties concerned. If the polling must be staggered, there are advantages as well disadvantages associated with reading the control unit counters immediately after the polling is finished, as mentioned below: Disadvantages: Results of the earlier phases may affect the polling of later phases. However, there are no studies about the amount of effect of the earlier results. The later phases do get affected by the earlier phases any way, by the exit polls, false or real. In the age of Internet and other means of fast communication, speculation about the results of the earlier phases can be stopped. We cannot say that the effect of the real results of earlier polls is worse, on the later polls, than the effect of speculations based on exit polls of the earlier phases (tainted or otherwise)? Advantages: ???Fairness??? of the election, at the very least ???perception of fairness???, will improve with counting right at closure of the polls. Security problems involved in transportation of the control units and their safe keeping in the strong rooms will be obviated. The advantage of ???fairness??? in the election, or at least ???perception of improved fairness???, far outweighs the disadvantage of the earlier phases affecting the later phases of election, particularly in view of the fact that exit polls (false and/or real) are available to affect the polls in the later phases. A perception of ???unfairness??? in counting the votes (even if unfounded) can severely jeopardize the faith of the public in democracy itself. In light of the above, even if the polls must be staggered in several phases, counting should be done immediately after the poll closure, right at the poll booths, rather than at the end of all phases. In closing, allow me to say that even if you cannot comply with the aforesaid caste distribution among various triads of decision-makers, your any effort on your part towards compliance of any of the above mentioned requests will be very much appreciated. Thanking you very much, Sincerely yours, Dr. Satinath Choudhary President, Better Democracy Forum 115 W 238 Street, Bronx, New York 10463, USA India contact: Boring Canal Road, S.P. Sinha Path, Patna-800 001, India Mobile phone (India) : 98995 39105 |
|
| << March21, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net]NBC Press Note |
March21, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net] Indian Tax payer and the Pravasi Bharatiya Diwas >> |
|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
|
Archives powered by Zinester's Mailing List Service
Details on India Thinkers Net |
Browse for more newsletters at Zinester's Ezine Directory
Managed by Zinester's Mailing List Management |