What the Election Commission of India must clarify[edit | edit source]
- Why were the CandidateAc files on the ECI Website coded between the 6th of May and 15th of May 2009?
- How was the votes polled information for 8023 candidates available before counting and in the case of phase 4 and 5 before polling?
- If the coded data is ordered by votes polled, why is there a significant match with the final ordering, particularly 108 winners?
- Why has the ECI not reacted to repeated pleas for clarification Prof Madhav Nalapat and Dr. Anupam Saraph?
- Why was the spreadsheet CandidateAC on the ECI website not updated after the results were declared on the 16th of May till its abrupt removal from the site on the 15th of July?
- Why were the "results" declared on different web locations in multiple files whose numbers do not tally?
What the Election Commission of India must implement to restore faith in the Democratic Process[edit | edit source]
- Each voter must get a receipt stamped and signed by the returning officer indicating the name of the constituency, the time of voting, the location of the polling station, the voters choice of candidate and an ID code of the EVM where the vote was cast.
- A database of receipts must also be collated onto a consolidated database of votes to be publicly audit-able.
- Create a time-bound program to move from EVM to ATM's, mobile phones and internet (along the lines of e-banking) and simplify the voting process to one that a 5 year old can understand.
Election Reforms[edit | edit source]
The Election Commission must adapt clear norms to certify a democratic election process. Any program on election reforms must therefore ensure:
- the election is transparent: no election is transparent if it does not provide for independent third party audits by anyone or uses closed standards and technologies to manage any part of the process.
- the election is honest: no election is honest or accountable if it denies (or requires court interventions or RTI applications for) a receipt to each voter and a poll-booth vise statement of voters, votes cast and votes received by each candidate to the public.
- the election is fair: no election is fair if it denies the right to track ones vote at least throughout the tenure of the elected body (if not for life).
- the election is open: no election is open unless it allows everyone the possibility to exercise franchise in a multitude of ways (by paper, by mobile, by ATM, by internet, by EVM etc) from a multitude of locations (anywhere in the world).
- the election is people centered: no election is people centered unless it allows the people a continued right and ability to shift their vote to an alternate candidate any time in the tenure of the elected body (or better for life).
- the election must be a level-playing field: no election is level-field unless it eliminates provides each candidate an identical opportunity to reach out to the community.
- the election must be public: no election is public unless it satisfies transparency, honesty, fairness, openness, is people centered and provides a level flied.
By corollary an election fraud would repeatedly deny one or more of these.
References:[edit | edit source]
- Tracking the elections
- Questions about Indian democracy raised by the data on the ECI website
- 2009 Elections: Promises and Reality
- Voting Reforms: Options in an imperfect world
- Copy of letter sent to the ECI requesting clarifications
- Researching the coded database
- Case for Election Reforms
- Review the 2009 Lok Sabha Election Process: Promises and Reality
- Results before Voting?
- EVM Issues
- Results before voting
- Minutes of meeting with the ECI mailed to them
- Notes on the Meeting with the ECI
- Presentation on Safeguarding Democracy
- Whitepaper on Safeguarding Democracy
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.