Donald Trump was an ungracious winner. Even while victorious,  thanks to a quirk of the American electoral system, he complained that millions of illegals had voted for  Hillary Clinton,  though she had polled nearly two million more valid votes. His churlishness was not entirely unexpected.  Trump’s make-up and narcissism explain his cheap jibes. 

Nearer home it is hard to make sense of the non-stop wailing by the losers of the recent Assembly polls over the Electronic Voting Machines. If you believe the Mayawatis, Digvijay Singhs, Ghulam Nabi Azads and Arvind Kejriwals and others of their ilk on the Opposition benches, the EVMs stole the election away from them to hand a great victory to their common enemy  Narendra Modi. Of course, it is utter nonsense.   

Post-defeat, the campaign of calumny unleashed against the EVMs may well be an attempt to boost the morale of their fast diminishing troops, especially when, within days, the losers, without being given any time to nurse their grievous wounds, were made to plunge into another election. The campaign to elect three new civic bodies in the national capital is already underway. Yes, Delhi has three municipal corporations, an unthinking trifurcation of the  Municipal Corporation of Delhi being one of the more audacious follies of an otherwise level-headed Shiela Dikshit in her third and last five-year term as chief minister. 

However, the concerted denigration of the EVMs seeks to bring into disrepute the one institution that Indians over the years have come to respect for its impartiality and quiet efficiency. The Election Commission at the top might be peopled by superannuated bureaucrats but, once there, it is to their credit that they all  come to exemplify model conduct, steering clear of favouritism and any other impropriety. Of course, much of the credit for making the EC a formidable force as a protector of the country’s electoral system belongs to the redoubtable T. N. Seshan. 

The same Seshan as a senior bureaucrat had been most obsequious, even attracting derision for running behind the vehicle of then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, but once he moved to Nirvachan Sadan, he revealed his no-nonsense, nay, ferocious side. The man lauded by the media and hated by the political class in almost equal measure once joked publicly that he ate politicians for breakfast.  While that inelegant boast was never tested, the truth is that he did succeed in asserting the authority of the Election Commission. Before him, especially during the Indira Gandhi years, the Election Commission had become a virtual extension of the ruling party.

But Seshan cleaned up the election process to such an extent that he literally took fun out of the elections. Hitherto these were the most colourful festivals which Indians of all castes and creeds, regions and religions enjoyed immensely. But Seshan turned them into a business-like affair; some would say virtually soulless affairs. While the ostensible use of money and muscle power largely disappeared, or rather driven underground,  the actual process of voting became more transparent. In this, the increasing use of EVMs made a huge contribution.

In the pre-EVM era, initially, candidates would buy ballot papers, with individual voters instead of stuffing them in separate boxes kept for each party and/or candidate would pocket it to trade it outside the polling booth for a small fee with whoever was willing to pay the highest price. Once enough ballots were so procured trusted party workers would go and stuff inside the appropriate boxes.  Also, there was widespread intimidation of voters and even seizure of polling booths in far-flung parts of Bihar and UP.

Seshan’s toughness ensured that most blatant abuses of the electoral process virtually disappeared overnight. The model code of conduct, which though lacking legal sanction, also circumscribed the capacity of various contenders to do mischief. Fortunately, the welcome initiative shown by Seshan to reclaim power of the Election Commission from the executive and politicians has been duly built upon further by his successors, even though at the time of appointment allowed their move to EC to the ruling party of the day.


In fact, the introduction of EVMs constitutes the single most important reform of the electoral system. Despite their denigration by various losers, the truth is that the EVMs have largely insulated against the hijacking of the popular will by usurpers through the use of money or muscle power. To this day, it has not been established even remotely how these stand-alone, lone-chip computers devised by the Indian public sector companies, can be manipulated.  


Quite aside from the most hazardous job of breaking into the safe houses where these machines are kept, it is hard for anyone to predict the order in which the names of contending candidates  in a given constituency would appear on the EVMs on the completion of scrutiny of withdrawal of nominations. Besides, the fact that all parties, including the present ruling party, have at one time or the other blamed the EVMs for their loss, it would further buttress the near-complete incorruptibility of the EVMs.

Yes, there is a lot that still needs  to be done to rid the system of malpractices. But almost all of it lies in the political domain, with the onus on the parties rather than the EC to become more transparent. They often use money and muscle power and resort to intimidation and threats against the vulnerable sections of voters. Even the recent changes in law for political donations are far from perfect, but at least the direction and intent is commendable. For complete transparency in political donations, the maturity required of the political class may yet be absent.


Hopefully, in time corporates will be able to contribute to their favourite parties without fear of punishment by the rival political parties.       
In the end, what the critics of the EVMs fail to appreciate is that they actually insult the voters by questioning the popular verdict.   Also,  they show scant understanding of the growing awareness among the poor and the illiterate voters in the farthermost hamlet in UP or Bihar, thanks to the near-universal reach of the media and, above all,  due to the ever-deepening of the democratic process.  Each election serves as a tutorial for ordinary voters, loosening the hold of caste and religion and germinating the seeds of superiority of individual self- interest over group interests in the democratic exercise. In short, the losers should move on, instead of becoming a butt of ridicule.

                                                           ****                           ****                                              ****                                     **** 
What is CBI up to?

At one level, you ought to welcome the rather belated CBI exertions to ensure that L K Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and a few other top leaders of the Ram Janambhoomi movement are brought to justice for the demolition of the disputed structure in Ayodhya in 1992. But at another level, the belated CBI activism in the case, when Advani and Co. were cleared of the conspiracy charges by the Allahabad High Court in 2010, seems suspect. Is there more than meets the eye in the CBI appeal to appeal against the clean chit given to Advani by the  High Court? We hope not, though we cannot rule out altogether.     


Last week, the  Additional Solicitor  General Neeraj Kaul pleaded in the Supreme Court to revive the conspiracy charges against Advani and Co, wanting them to be tried along with  13 others in the on-going case in a Lucknow court. 

Now, unless the objective was to ensure all leaders of the Ram temple campaign were treated on the same footing as the 13 foot soldiers, and there was a good reason to believe that  the case in Lucknow would end in clear acquittal for all the accused,  the CBI eagerness to appeal against Advani’s  exoneration  would raise doubts about the agency’s intentions. In any case, regardless of the final outcome in Lucknow,  the revival of the conspiracy charge against Advani would effectively rule him out for the President’s post this  July. Maybe that is the idea behind  CBI activism, especially when it has determinedly refused to appeal against the acquittal of some of the notable names in the ruling dispensation. 

****                            ****                                 ****                                                 ****                        

Politics in name of culture   

Last week the India International Centre was witness to something which it had not seen since its inception back in 1962. Ugly political partisanship came to the fore at the annual general meeting of the once widely respected hub of cultural and intellectual activity. It had thus far managed to steer clear of partisan politics. No longer, though. Kapila Vatsyan, the favourite cultural czarina of the Congress Party establishment, was keen to head the IIC yet again. And she felt foiled by Soli Sorabjee, the eminent lawyer, who got the nod of three of the five members of the board of trustees. In the orchestrated show of anger at the  AGM, some members questioned the manner in which Sorabjee had got himself a second term, though it must be said to his credit that he is not remotely tainted by the brush of partisan politics. 

As IIC President earlier, Vatsyan was usually reluctant to grant admission to those whom she perceived to be anti-Congress. Indeed, senior IAS officer Bhure Lal long before his retirement was brusquely told by Vatsyan that he could not be admitted because he was “ against the Gandhis”.  Only when Lal threatened to go to court was he made a member. In her late 80s, Vatsyan headed the Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts for the longest period until removed by the Modi Government.  






Virendra Kapoor is a Delhi-based journalist. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's own and do not reflect the view of Asianet Newsable