Ayes and nays: On remote EVMs for domestic migrants
Higher turnout is worth striving for, but not without sufficient safeguards
Given the regional variations in demographic trends and economic opportunities, India has a high rate of migration , which doubled in the census decade of 2001-2011. Migrants often see their political and economic rights compromised at their place of origin and residence. The Election Commission of India (ECI) has now proposed a mechanism to facilitate remote voting for domestic migrants. The Remote Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) prototype can be used for up to 72 constituencies simultaneously from a single, remote polling booth . The ECI has invited political parties for a demonstration of the prototype on January 16. A concept note by the Commission takes into account the legal, operational, administrative and technological challenges at hand . Voter participation is comparatively high in India; yet, in 2019, one in three voters did not turn up. Going by the 2017 Economic Survey, there are around 14 crore internal migrants in the country, and they have to cross many hurdles to be able to vote. Anything that advances their rights must be welcomed . But a hurried move will only do more damage to the integrity of the electoral process, which many fear is eroding , and for valid reasons. The ECI’s recent conduct, including in the 2022 Gujarat Assembly elections, has been less than reassuring .
The ECI proposes to have remote voting for migrants as early as this year. While there is no technical basis for allegations of fraud in the current, single-constituency, non-networked EVMs, public trust in them has never been lower than it is today. Public trust is the only strength of any electoral process. With EVMs, the voter has no way to see whether the vote is recorded as it is cast . The ECI’s ambitious plan comes against this backdrop of public scepticism about its own impartiality and, less justifiably, about the reliability of the EVMs. The proposed plan will add more questions to the mix , including some fundamental ones such as about the correlation between citizenship and territoriality . In an era of unprecedented human mobility , the idea of portable voting rights is worth considering , but it will have far-reaching ramifications that should be accounted for . Defining a migrant who is eligible to vote remotely is going to be controversial — for instance , when does a migrant at a place become a resident? Even the ECI had expressed doubts about the practicality of remote voting rights for migrants in the past. Meanwhile , there is also an active demand for voting rights for Non-Resident Indians. Higher turnout is worth striving for, but not without sufficient safeguards.