9 hours ago
Cameras, courts and confidentiality: Inside Election Commission's 45-day rule
While one is hearing whispers from many quarters that videos from the polling stations should be made available, sources with the Election Commission have told India today that this is VOTER SECRECY COMES FIRST - ECIThe Election Commission of India (ECI) has taken a firm stance:It will not yield to political privacy and security are will not be released publicly except under court secrecy is a constitutional guarantee, protected under Section 128 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Any violation of this confidentiality is a punishable offence, inviting imprisonment, fines, or FOOTAGE: WHY IT'S STORED AND WHY IT CAN'T BE SHARED
Despite mounting pressure from political parties and advocacy groups, polling station footage will not be made public, sources within the Election Commission told India video recordings related to polling are preserved for 45 days after election results are declared in line with the statutory window for filing an Election Petition (EP) under Indian such a petition is filed, the footage is retained until the legal proceedings conclude and may be submitted in court if EXACTLY GETS RECORDED?The Election Commission deploys video surveillance and webcasting extensively to uphold transparency and accountability throughout the election process. Recordings cover:EVM checking and storageMovement and transport of voting machinesActivities inside and outside polling stations on voting dayThe counting processCampaign events and public ralliesadvertisementThis system allows the EC to track expenditures, ensure compliance with the Model Code of Conduct, and address any electoral violations PUBLIC SHARING OF THIS FOOTAGE IS PROBLEMATICDespite its critical role in election monitoring, this footage is not intended for public release. Calls to make it public, although framed as transparency demands, are both misleading and dangerous, the EC cautions. Key Risks Include:Threat to Voter PrivacyPolling footage can unintentionally disclose:Identities of voters entering of individual about voter turnout or access to such data can lead to:Voter profilingTargeted harassment or intimidationRetaliation in areas with low or 'undesirable' turnoutSources in the EC stress that such risks strike at the heart of free and fair LEGAL SHIELD: SECRECY AND THE COURTSSupreme Court Precedent: Right Not to Vote = Right to PrivacyIn the landmark case People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (2013), the Supreme Court ruled that:Citizens have the right not to right is covered under the right to the act of abstaining from voting must be kept non-voters could expose them to coercion, pressure, or social discrimination, all of which are = A 'LIVE' FORM 17AadvertisementElection footage effectively mirrors Form 17A, a sensitive record maintained at polling stations that logs:Voter arrival roll from polling stations captures similar details, making it equivalent to a 'live' version of Form Rule 93(1) of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, Form 17A is protected from public access and can only be examined under court supervision. Since video footage captures similar data, its public release without legal sanction is equally OF MISUSE: A REAL POSSIBILITYMaking this footage publicly accessible can have severe consequences:Political actors may identify and target voters who didn't support may face harassment, inducement, or social can be edited or misused, fuelling conspiracy theories and prevent such scenarios, the EC discourages footage retention beyond 45 days unless a legal challenge necessitates MEANT FOR INTERNAL OVERSIGHT, NOT PUBLIC DISTRIBUTIONWebcasting serves as a real-time monitoring mechanism for the EC, helping prevent malpractice and streamline election its purpose is strictly a court requires this footage during an election petition, the EC will provide it with full assurance that judicial processes also safeguard voter Watch
