EC Flags Legal and Transparency Concerns Over EVM Totaliser

The Election Commission of India has told the Supreme Court that the existing legal framework and judicial directions do not permit the introduction of totalisers for aggregating votes recorded across polling stations in a constituency. The EC made the submission in an affidavit filed before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant. The matter relates to a 2014 public interest litigation filed by Yogesh Gupta, seeking the introduction of totalisers to strengthen confidence in the security and integrity of the vote-counting process. The proposed system would electronically connect the control units of EVMs used at different polling stations and count the votes collectively. According to the EC, implementing such a system would require amendments to the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. Discussions on the proposal have been underway among the EC, the Law Ministry and a parliamentary committee since 2008. The Commission said 21 political parties and a Group of Ministers had opposed the proposal in 2016, arguing that booth-level voting patterns are important for assessing and improving electoral performance.

The EC said it subsequently constituted a working group to study the feasibility of the totaliser system. It argued that booth-wise counting allows votes to be checked against Form 17C and provides candidates and their agents with mechanisms to seek VVPAT verification and recounts. According to the Commission, collective counting could reduce transparency and complicate the resolution of election disputes. It also cited Supreme Court directions requiring verification of VVPAT slips, including the prescribed checks in the N. Chandrababu Naidu versus Union of India case and the ADR versus ECI case. The EC cautioned that introducing a system without the necessary legal amendments could create new allegations and disputes at a time when public confidence in EVMs remains sensitive. It said any move to introduce totalisers would require political consensus, amendments to election rules and parliamentary approval.