New Delhi:
In a strong response to Mallikarjun Kharge's letter to INDIA allies alleging discrepancies in voter turnout data and stating that the credibility of the Election Commission of India is at “an all-time low”, the poll panel has accused the Congress president of making baseless allegations of “creating confusion, deception and impediments in the conduct of free and fair polls”.
In a sharply worded and unprecedented response on Friday, the election commission said Mr Kharge's letter was in the form of internal correspondence within a political group and yet he had made it public – a reference to the Congress president posting it on had posted. Condemning his question: “Could this be an attempt to influence the final results?” the panel said it could create an anarchic situation, along with doubts and disharmony.
Reacting to the allegations leveled by Mr Kharge – who is also the Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, point by point – the EC called them “insinuations and innuendos” and an “aggression on key points of live election operations”.
As for the main claims in Mr Kharge's letter – that voter turnout increased by about 5.5% in the first phase and by about 5.74% in the second phase and that the publication of the data was delayed – the European Commission said there was no delay and pointed out that the updated turnout data has always been higher than what was released on election day. The commission backed up this claim by releasing a 'factual matrix' of election figures, starting with the 2019 Lok Sabha polls.
“The premise that voter turnout data was released too late is devoid of facts as it has always been available in the voter turnout app. The committee has not changed the design or periodicity of displaying attendance data in any way. It is unnecessary to add those polls. Station-wise data of voters and voters will be given to the representative of the candidate on the day of the election itself, at the close of polls,” the EC wrote.
'Tend to create disharmony'
On the Congress leader's other allegation that some media reports claimed that the final list of registered voters for the next phases had not been made public, the panel said he would know, “as a senior parliamentarian, a very experienced politician… . and as head of a prominent National Political Party” that the EC follows a transparent process of preparing electoral lists.
This, according to the report, is further enhanced by the participation of political parties and candidates at every stage of the process, ensuring that parties are aware of the number of voters at each stage of the election cycle.
Expressing its displeasure over the post, the panel wrote: “The Commission wants you to understand that your comments/observations/allegations in the above-mentioned post border on attacking the constitutionally mandated work of ECI.”
“Through innuendo and innuendo, the content of the post tends to create disharmony regarding the delicate space of election management, may sow doubt in the minds of voters and political parties and possibly create an anarchic situation, when you say ' could be'. this is an attempt to manipulate the final results?”, which this Commission hopes you do not intend. The Commission is confident that all stakeholders in the Indian elections and especially the people of India will treat these observations of yours with the same disdain consider (sic),” it said.
'Protect democracy'
In his letter, Mr Kharge had claimed that the credibility of the Election Commission of India was at an all-time low and that it had, “perhaps for the first time in history”, announced the final voting percentages of the first and last Election Commission delayed. second phase of the Lok Sabha elections.
He said the Electoral Commission had previously published turnout data within 24 hours of the election and wondered what had changed this time and why there was no clarification. “Is there a problem with the EVMs,” Mr Kharge had asked.
Listing other grievances and urging leaders of other INDIA block parties to hold the Election Commission accountable and protect its independence, the Congress President said, “As the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA), it should be our collective effort to Democracy and protection of the independent functioning of the ECI. All the above facts force us to ask a question: could this be an attempt to manipulate the final results?