Former Election Commissioner (EC) Ashok Lavasa speaks to Preetha Nair about the current controversy surrounding the duplication of Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC) and says the only document available to weed it out is the unique identification number.
Excerpts from the interview:
What’s view on the row over duplicate Election Photo Identity cards?
We have to look at it from two different points of view. The complaint that has been filed concerns people having the same EPIC number, that is, more than one person having the same EPIC number. The Election Commission has also acknowledged that the problem exists and is trying to resolve it. It is a welcome sign, and the issue should not be politicised.
The other issue is de-duplication, which the EC has been attempting for a long time. One problem is one person having one EPIC number registering himself in more than one place, and the other is two people having the same EPIC number. We need to believe what the CEC has said that they will try to ensure that every voter has a unique Epic number.
ECI said it’s a legacy issue. How can it be addressed?
The ECI is right. Earlier, the electoral registration system was with the state chief electoral officers and district electoral officers. Now, the electoral roll database of states and UTs has been shifted to the integrated ERONET platform.
ERONET requires every state to have a different series. However, regarding the de-duplication issue, the EC has to devise a mechanism to identify which elector is registering at more than one place.
The ECI is set to link the voter ID card with Aadhaar. This is at variance with its earlier position that linkage could be optional.
The only document available to weed out the duplication of voter cards is the unique identification number (UID). So, if you link Aadhaar with the electoral roll that is the only possible way to assign any uniqueness to the voter list or the EPIC unless some other viable technical methodology is found.
Many have raised concerns about privacy infringement, voter profiling, etc.
The Aadhaar Act does not make having an Aadhaar mandatory. The EC has held, and in my view, the right to vote is not dependent on having an Aadhaar. That should be separated. As far as the Aadhaar is concerned, it can be used for administrative purposes to de-duplicate. That doesn’t mean you can deny somebody the right to be included in the electoral list if they are eligible.
Shouldn’t it be optional?
If you make it optional, it cannot be used as a screening mechanism. The debate should be on how to de-duplicate. As far as the present system is concerned, this is the only way because Aadhaar has biometrics.
We need to ask ourselves a question: What harm can be caused to a voter if it is identified that she is the unique person registered on the electoral roll? The privacy of her Aadhaar can still be protected as provided for in the law.
Opposition parties flagged concerns on the alleged surge in electors during the Assembly polls in Maharashtra and Delhi. How will one explain the surge?
Identifying the voter’s uniqueness is an answer to that problem because one person is not supposed to have more than one Aadhaar. Regarding the surge in the number of electors, the EC must explain why the number of electors registered increased abnormally. That is one part of the story.
The question is how to de-duplicate them if these people were already enrolled in another place and were also enrolled here. The EC is already in consultation with political parties and technical departments. So they have to come up with a solution because there are already 98 crore registered voters. We don’t know how many people could be registered in more than one place; the same person registered in more than one place. In my view, Aadhaar is the only document that can be used for de-duplication.
The Opposition has been alleging of manipulation of EVMs. Are they susceptible to it?
These are two different questions - whether EVMs have been manipulated and if they can be manipulated. Since these matters are in court, the EC will come up with its explanation and let the courts decide. There have been over 40 cases in the courts on this. The court has given neither an opinion nor judgment against the EVMs or suggestions that EVMs are manipulated.
On the question of whether the EVMs can be manipulated in the future, I feel that the EC, along with the stakeholders, must continuously review the systems to plug any loopholes.
The Opposition wants 100% verification of VVPAT slips.
Let the EC talk to the stakeholders, and if they think this will create confidence, then they can go for 100% counting of slips in one or two random assembly constituencies. The courts have increased VVPAT verification to five random EVMs in each Assembly segment, and no discrepancy has been found so far. The electoral process is about building confidence.
How can the trust deficit between the EC and the Opposition be bridged?
It’s about engaging with the stakeholders, taking their concerns seriously, and respond. Transparency will create more confidence.
CEC and ECs appointment under the new law is being contested by the Opposition
A more broad-based selection panel will create greater confidence.
Your view on ‘One Nation, One Election’
It is essential to consider whether the administrative gains or the management efficiency through simultaneous elections is beneficial. I don’t see how an election in Kerala or Nagaland affects any other state.
The provisions in the draft bill say that in the event of a government falling in the middle of its tenure, there will be a new election, but it will be for a curtailed period. If they are still not ruling out the possibility of elections taking place, it’s of no advantage.