GVL Narasimha Rao Democracy at Risk! Can we trust our Electronic Voting Machines? Copyright @ GVL Narasimha Rao 2010 All rights reserved Published in 2010 by Citizens for Verifiability, Transparency & Accountability in Elections B4/ 137, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110 029 [email protected], [email protected] Phone: 91 9873300800 (Sagar Baria) Printed in India by: Sharp Prints, G-5, Red Rose Building, 49-50 Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019 Email: [email protected] Dedicated to the Citizens of India: They deserve a fully transparent and verifiable electoral system Contents Foreword by Shri L.K. Advani Message from Shri N. Chandrababu Naidu Message from Prof. David L. Dill, Stanford University Acknowledgments Introduction 1 1 The India EVM Story 7 2 The Big Lie 19 3 Questionable Decisions of Election Commission 31 4 Faulty Machines Cause Tampering Concerns 41 5 Electronic Fixers Demand Hefty Sums 57 6 The X Factor 65 7 Vote of No Confidence 83 8 Farce of Enquiry by Election Commission 97 9 Commission Blocks Ethical Hacking 111 10 Voting Machines Demystified 123 11 Software Isn't Safe… 133 12 …..Nor is Hardware 147 13 Weak Links in the Chain 159 14 Hacking EVMs, Hijacking the Mandate 173 15 Are Indian EVMs Constitutional? 179 16 Restore Transparency & Verifiability 187 Annexures List of Annexures 1. 'Resolution on Electronic Voting,' Verified Voting Foundation 195 2. 'Use of Electronic Voting Machines Unconstitutional' – Judgment of Federal Constitutional Court of Germany (Press Release) 197 3. 'We Do Not Trust Machines' (Article in Newsweek) 203 4. 'How To Trust Electronic Voting' (Editorial in New York Times) 206 5. 'The Good News (Really) About Voting Machines' (Article in New York Times) 208 6. 'A Single Person could Swing an Election' (Article in Washington Post) 213 7. Election Petition of Congress candidate Alok Jena in Orissa High Court (Extracts) 215 8. Writ petition of Subramanian Swamy in Delhi High Court (Extracts) 221 Foreword n many democracies of the world the issue of electronic voting Imachines has become a matter of wide-spread public discussion. In India we have been conducting our elections through this device for the last two Lok Sabha elections and also in various Assembly elections held recently. But as yet there has been little debate on how useful these machines have proved. So when the author of this book G.V.L. Narasimha Rao approached me and requested me to write its Foreword, I not only accepted his plea, but complimented him for his efforts to compile all the facts he could on the subject and initiate a debate. The title of the book is certainly provocative. Electoral Reforms has been my favourite subject of study since the mid sixties. When I was elected to Rajya Sabha in 1970, I discussed the matter with Shri Vajpayee who was at that time a member of Lok Sabha. He agreed to raise the issue in the Lower House, and try to have a JPC set up to study the question. Those days the issue of defections, abuse of governmental power in polls and growing misuse of money power in elections were three evils causing concern to everyone concerned with the health of Indian democracy. It was at the initiative of Shri Vajpayee that in 1970 a Joint Parliamentary Committee for Electoral Reforms was set up. Both he as well as I served on this Committee. This Committee proved short lived because the Lok Sabha was dissolved in 1971. After the 1971 general elections, Shri Vajpayee raised the issue once again and saw to it that a new JPC was constituted. This Committee which gave its report in 1972 made several important recommendations some of which were accepted. The initiative taken by Vajpayee did not end there. Since then, several other committees have been formed, all aimed at reforming the poll process. My party has been proactively cooperating with all such efforts - be it the Tarkunde Committee (1974) or the Dinesh Goswami Committee (1990) or the Indrajit Gupta Committee (1998). The NDA Government headed by Shri Vajpayee also took several initiatives. But I must admit that the phenomenal increase in the cost of elections and increasing corruption that is being witnessed is extremely worrisome. (i) I understand that some time next month the Election Commission proposes to convene a meeting of political parties to discuss various issues relating to poll reforms. I have had occasion to speak to the Chief Election Commissioner myself and draw his attention to the evil of 'paid news', a form of media corruption which has besmirched recent elections. I understand that this issue is going to be discussed at this meeting. I suggest that the question of EVM also be taken up. I personally regard it significant that Germany, technologically, one of the most advanced countries of the world, has become so wary of EVMs as to ban their use altogether. Many states in USA have mandated that EVMs can be used only if they have a paper back-up. So manufacturers of electronic voting machines in USA have developed a technology referred to as Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT). Every voter who exercises his vote on the EVM gets a print out in a ballot box so that if there is any discrepancy in the machine either because of mal-functioning or because of mischief the paper ballots can be counted. Today 32 out of 50 states in the USA have passed laws making these VVPAT voting machines compulsory. The U.S. Congress has pending before it a federal law similar to that of the State laws. I think the Election Commission would be strengthening democracy if it contemplates similar legislation by the Indian Parliament also. January 26, 2010 L.K. Advani (ii) Message here is an on-going debate in the country on the efficacy of TEVMs in recording of votes according to the wish of the voter concerned. A leading non-governmental organization, Jana Chaitanya Vedika has demonstrated before the press the vulnerability of these machines. Sri Omesh Saigal, a former Secretary to the Government of India, has also complained that it is "possible and plausible" to manipulate EVMs to obtain a perverse result. The standard defence put forward by the Election Commission of India is that the EVMs are manufactured and supplied by the leading public sector undertakings and they were introduced after a series of field trials and expert checks. However, the facts do not support the confidence expressed by the Election Commission. The experts highlight several lacunae which give rise to doubts about the integrity of the EVMs. Credibility is the essence of the election process, and one cannot ignore the fact that technologically advanced countries like Germany, Ireland, Netherlands and the U.S.A. are either banning or prescribing stringent conditions for the usage of EVMs for registering the public vote. I feel that it is incumbent on the Election Commission of India to address the concerns of the public seriously and to take steps to ensure that EVMs are used in future only with adequate safeguards. I wish to congratulate GVL Narasimha Rao, whom I have known for many years, for the immense effort he has put in to bring out this important book. It presents a very comprehensive analysis of all the issues concerning EVMs, backed up by facts and the views of Indian and international experts. I do hope that the book opens up the issue for a national debate, and that we may soon have a reformed voting system in which our citizens can repose confidence. February 1, 2010 (N. Chadrababu Naidu) (iii) Message Prof. David L. Dill Stanford University n important function of elections is to establish the Alegitimacy of the elected officials in the eyes of the public. Skeptical, untrusting observers should be able to see that election results are accurate. It is not sufficient for election results to be accurate; the public must know that the results are accurate. Civil society is damaged if elections are not credible, even in the absence of demonstrable fraud. In traditional elections, paper ballots contribute to election credibility because voters can ensure that their votes have been properly recorded (when they write them on the ballot), and poll workers and observers at the polling place can ensure that ballots are not changed, added or removed after being deposited in the ballot box. In contrast, purely electronic voting machines do not allow voters to verify that their votes have been accurately recorded, and do not allow observers to witness that the ballots have not been tampered with. Electronic voting machines provide no evidence during or after the election to convince a skeptic that the election results are accurate. It is not clear that this situation would be acceptable even if electronic voting machines could be guaranteed to be accurate and honest. But such assurances are well beyond the current state of computer technology. It is not practical to design fully error-free and reliable computing equipment. More importantly, it is not feasible to prevent malicious changes to the machines' hardware or software. Electronic voting machines are especially vulnerable to malicious changes by insiders such as designers, programmers, manufacturers, maintenance technicians, etc. Of course, these problems are magnified enormously when the design of the machines is held secret from independent reviewers. With current technology, the only trustworthy voting technologies are those that allow individual voters to verify that their votes have been properly recorded on a paper ballot. In (iv) the United States, most voting systems rely on paper ballots that are filled out directly by the voters, and counted either by hand or by machine.