Greetings, dear reader! Let me tell you an absorbing story about the judicial inquisitiveness through which our country got immersed. The venerated views of the Supreme Court have been relied upon to test the precise workings of something as delicate as our electoral process.
The top court, through the bedlam of pre-election controversies, has posed four difficult questions to the Election Commission of India, the same body that bears the sole responsibility for our democracy’s rallying points. Through these questions, we run behind the insides of the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machines, which say nothing but serve as sentriels that guard the ballot boxes.
The first question of the court has given a rather facetious explanation of the enigma of VVPAT slips that either remain undelivered or void, and this unconformity can totally ruin the very purpose of electoral transparency. To begin with, he or she needs to elaborate on how these trails are protected and kept safely, given that they are an expression of the democratic will of the people.
Lastly, the judiciary is curious about the processes that should take place to rectify the differences between the voter-verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) and the vote count registered by electronic machines. The discrepancies-resolving mechanism is highly influential on the credibility of election results.
In the end, the Supreme Court is advocating for certainty in the fate of VVPAT slips after reporting of the results is over, because these paper trails should not just be buried in oblivion. Should they be required to be witnesses to the purity of our democratic process in the future, this becomes a useful tool as a fail-safe.
The uncertainty, which is invoking its resonance in the hallways of justice, is now progressing—with some sort of suspense from the public—for the Election Commission’s response. And this is why it is through the furnace of openness and responsibility that the key features of our democratic organizations emerge and can be revealed.
