EVM magic in India

Описание: Observations:
1. EVM-Adopting Nations: Countries like India, Brazil, Bhutan, Namibia, and Venezuela prefer EVMs for their speed, accuracy, and resistance to traditional electoral fraud.
2. Ballot-Adopting Nations: Nations like Germany, the Netherlands, and Canada prefer paper ballots due to concerns over EVM security, transparency, and voter verifiability.
3. Mixed Systems: Countries like the U.S., Australia, and Belgium adopt a combination of EVMs and ballots, giving flexibility to regions or states.
4. Internet Voting Pioneers: Estonia leads in online voting for tech-friendly and efficient electoral processes.
Conclusion: Why Advanced Countries Are Banning EVM Voting
Several advanced countries like Germany, the Netherlands, and Norway have discontinued or avoided full-scale adoption of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). The primary reasons are rooted in concerns about transparency, security, and public trust. Here's an analysis of their rationale:
________________________________________
1. Transparency and Trust
• Lack of Verifiability: EVMs often lack a tangible, verifiable audit trail unless integrated with systems like Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT). Advanced democracies prioritize the ability for voters and auditors to independently verify results, which is easier with paper ballots.
• Perception of Opacity: Many EVM systems rely on proprietary software and hardware, leading to scepticism about what happens "inside the machine."
________________________________________
2. Security Concerns
• Risk of Hacking: Advanced countries emphasize cybersecurity risks. While EVMs are not directly connected to the internet, concerns about tampering during manufacturing, transportation, or programming remain.
• Foreign Interference: Nations like Germany and the Netherlands have cited risks of external actors (e.g., foreign governments, hackers) manipulating results.
________________________________________
3. Court Rulings and Legal Frameworks
• Germany: The Federal Court ruled in 2009 that EVMs violated constitutional principles of transparency because voters could not see how their votes were counted.
• Netherlands: Discontinued EVMs in 2007 due to insufficient security measures and the risk of hacking.
________________________________________
4. Public Confidence
• Erosion of Trust: In technologically advanced societies, even the perception of potential tampering can undermine confidence in the democratic process. Returning to paper ballots restores faith in the system for many voters.
• Preference for Simplicity: Paper ballots are perceived as straightforward and tamper-proof, offering a visual and physical confirmation of votes.
________________________________________
5. Cost-Benefit Analysis
• High Maintenance Costs: EVMs require constant updates, maintenance, and secure handling. For smaller or less frequent elections, many advanced countries find paper-based systems more cost-effective.
• Election Size and Complexity: Advanced nations with smaller populations (e.g., Germany, Norway) can efficiently handle manual vote counting, making EVMs less necessary.
________________________________________
Key Takeaway
Advanced countries banning or avoiding EVMs reflect their prioritization of transparency, verifiability, and public trust, often opting for systems that provide physical proof of voting. Conversely, developing nations Favor EVMs for their efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and fraud prevention capabilities, particularly in large-scale elections.