1 week ago
101
The Supreme Court on Wednesday underscored that it cannot ask the Election Commission of India (ECI) to disclose the source codes of the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) as it can result in its misuse. The source code often called “the brain” refers to a set of instructions that tells the machine how to function.
A Bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta made the observation while hearing a batch of petitions seeking 100% cross-verification of the vote count in EVMs with Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) paper slips.
Also read: What is the EVM-VVPAT verification issue before the Supreme Court? | Explained
During the proceedings, senior advocate Santhosh Paul appearing for one of the petitioners made a plea for disclosure of such source codes. However, Justice Khanna turned down the request saying that “it should not be disclosed” as “it will be misused”. The development comes even as the Lok Sabha elections are headed for the second phase of polling on April 26.
Nearly a week after the case was reserved for judgment, the Court returned with a series of queries for the apex polling body including whether the microcontrollers used in the EVMs were reprogrammable. After seeking the required clarifications, the Court again reserved its order while assuring that it would look into the possible reforms needed to strengthen the current polling system.
Also Read: EVM-VVPAT case LIVE updates
‘Sensitive issue’
In September last year, the Supreme Court reiterated its stand by dismissing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition seeking an independent audit of the source codes of the EVMs. A bench presided by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y.Chandrachud orally remarked that placing such sensitive details in the public domain would be a security risk.
“It shouldn’t be in the public domain, because the moment you place it in the public domain, there is a danger that that will itself be subject to misuse,” he reasoned. The Chief Justice further highlighted that there was no actionable material on record to indicate that the ECI breached its constitutional mandate of holding elections.
“Ultimately, the manner in which the source code ought to be audited and whether the audit should be placed in the public domain bears on sensitive issues pertaining to the integrity of the election process which are conducted under the superintendence of the ECI. On such a policy issue, we are not inclined to pass directions sought by the petitioner… We are not inclined to entertain the petition,” the Court recorded in its order.
