Last Updated:
The Election Commission cited privacy and legal issues in response to Rahul Gandhi’s demand for CCTV footage of polling stations. Gandhi urged publishing digital voter rolls.
Voting Underway For Assembly Bypolls On Five Seats Across Four States. (Photo: PTI file)
Following a demand made by Congress MP and Lok Sabha LoP Rahul Gandhi, the Election Commission on Saturday cited privacy and legal hurdles while sharing the CCTV footage of webcasting of the polling stations.
This comes after Rahul Gandhi has called upon the Election Commission to publish consolidated, digital, machine-readable voter rolls for the most recent elections to the Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabhas of all states, including Maharashtra, saying that “telling the truth” will protect the poll panel’s credibility.
ECI said that the seemingly legitimate appeal of releasing the videos or CCTV footage from polling stations on election day undermines voter privacy and security, contradicting the Representation of the People Act and Supreme Court guidelines.
“What is veiled as a very logical demand is actually entirely contrary to the privacy and security concerns of the voters, legal position laid down in the Representation of the People Act, 1950/1951 and the directions of the Supreme Court of India,” it said.
“Sharing of the footage, which would enable easy identification of the electors by any group or an individual, would leave both the elector who has voted as well as the elector who has not voted vulnerable to pressure, discrimination and intimidation by anti-social elements,” the poll body added.
It said that if a particular political party gets a lesser number of votes in a particular booth, it would easily be able to identify, through the CCTV footage, which elector has voted and which elector has not, and thereafter, may harass or intimidate the electors.
The Election Commission further issued a point-by-point rebuttal to the Congress MP.
Sharing of video footage may result in a violation of the right of secrecy of electors who have decided not to vote. In any election, there may be electors who decide not to vote. Sharing of video footage of the poll day may result in the identification of such electors. This can also lead to profiling of the voters who voted as well as those who did not vote, which may become the basis for discrimination, denial of services, intimidation or inducement.
Supreme Court order: The Supreme Court held that the right to vote includes the right not to vote, and the right of secrecy is accorded to even those persons who have decided not to vote.
Video footage: Polling day videography records the sequence of voters entering the polling station and their identities, similar to Form 17A, which contains sensitive information about voters, including their ID details and signatures. Both pose a risk to voting secrecy.
Violation of secrecy of voting is a punishable offence under Section 128 of RP Act, 1951 for – Any person who contravenes the provisions of this section is punishable with imprisonment for a term expending up to 3 months or fine or both.
- First Published:
