Blow to transparency

WHEN the Supreme Court declared the electoral bonds scheme unconstitutional in February this year, it emphasised the voter’s inalienable right to information — including the right to know the details of individuals and companies making donations to political parties. The landmark verdict also served as a reminder to the Union Government, which had backed the controversial scheme to the hilt, that there should be no compromise on transparency as the integrity of the entire electoral process was at stake. The Centre seems to have conveniently forgotten the SC’s ruling. Based on a recommendation of the Election Commission of India (ECI), the Law Ministry has amended Rule 93(2)(a) of the Conduct of Election Rules in order to prevent public scrutiny of electronic documents such as CCTV and webcasting footage as well as video recordings of candidates. The unconvincing argument is that such material, if made accessible to one and all, can be misused to the detriment of voter safety.

Such fears and concerns just don’t hold water in the age of social media. Footage of voters coming out of polling stations is widely available. In many cases, electors themselves share their photos and videos on digital platforms. The CCTV cameras installed at polling stations merely keep an eye on the poll officials – they do not violate the secrecy of the ballot. There is no camera that records the voter pressing a certain button on the EVM. Still, the ECI is losing sleep over this non-issue.

The timing of the amendment is a dead giveaway. It comes in the wake of the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s order that all documents related to the Haryana Assembly elections be shared with the petitioner in the ‘Mehmood Pracha vs ECI’ case, including CCTV camera footage as permissible under Rule 93(2). The ECI would be well advised to lift the veil of secrecy in the best interest of electoral democracy.