‘Institutionalisation of remote voting a hasty decision’

he Election Commission of India (ECI) suggesting the “institutionalisation of remote voting”, Trinamool Congress (TMC) national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee wrote back to the election body, opposing the move by calling it a “hasty decision” with “potentially damaging effects”.

The TMC, on Wednesday, shared the letter written by Abhishek to BC Patra, Secretary, ECI.

In his letter, Abhishek wrote that although the ECI feels that remote voting by domestic migrants will improve voter participation, the process, aside from the legal caveats of who is a ‘domestic migrant’, raises pertinent questions on the “transparency and sanctity” of the entire election process.

He wrote that the first major concern is the implementation of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and its strict monitoring.

Considering that the migrant voter is residing in a state where no elections are happening, there is a possibility of manipulation by different political parties in the absence of the MCC. In order to sway voters, the ruling party in the said state could use coercive measures not evident to the voting process and hamper free and fair elections, he felt.

He expressed his apprehension surrounding the security of the EVM machines used in remote voting. He fears it has a chance of running into vulnerability, considering the law and order in the away states would still be in control of the state governments and not the ECI.

He feels the ultimate results could be biased. “We have seen EVM machines being recovered from the homes and cars of political leaders in recent elections,” he remarked.

Abhishek reminded that it is not the first time that the ECI is mulling over possibilities of enabling blockchain technology for remote voting and that in the past such an idea was met with resistance owing to security vulnerabilities.

“By virtue of being distanced from the state where elections are being held, the said voter will be disengaged from the specific political underpinnings that inform his/her constituency and might thereby skew his/her opinion,” he wrote.