Election Commission Refuses to Reveal Software Used in Voter List Review

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has refused to reveal which software it used to identify possible errors in voter lists during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise. In its response to a Right to Information (RTI) application, the Commission said the details were protected under rules covering trade secrets and intellectual property.

The decision raises questions about how the software identifies errors and what safeguards are in place to prevent genuine voters from being wrongly flagged.

1. Why Has the Commission Withheld the Software Details?

The RTI applicant sought the software’s name and version. The Commission cited Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, which covers certain commercially confidential information and trade secrets.

However, the ECI clarified that no new software had been developed or purchased specifically for the SIR exercise.

2. Was Artificial Intelligence Used?

The Commission did not clarify whether artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning or predictive analytics was used to identify possible errors in voter records.

It said questions about how the software worked sought clarification rather than information covered by the RTI Act. Therefore, the response does not establish whether AI was used.

3. Can Software Automatically Delete Voters’ Names?

The Commission said that the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) for the relevant constituency is responsible for preparing and revising the voter list based on facts and records.

However, it did not separately explain whether software can automatically flag records for deletion or how such records are reviewed before action is taken.

4. Questions Over Review and Approval

The ECI cited Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act when responding to questions about the review and approval process. It also referred to Sections 13B(1) and 13B(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which deal with the responsibilities of electoral registration officers.

The key question remains: what checks are used to ensure that a genuine voter is not wrongly removed from the list?

5. Two Election Commissioners Raised Concerns About an Officer

In a separate development, RTI documents revealed that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi wrote separately to Cabinet Secretary T. V. Somanathan on July 29, raising concerns about the work of Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg.

The letters reportedly objected to a work-allocation order that the commissioners said had been issued without consulting them or the Commission. The Cabinet Secretariat acknowledged the letters and forwarded them to the Chief Election Commissioner’s office and the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT).

The documents add to questions about oversight and decision-making within the Election Commission. However, they do not by themselves establish wrongdoing by the officer concerned.