Hi Friends,

Even as I launch this today ( my 80th Birthday ), I realize that there is yet so much to say and do. There is just no time to look back, no time to wonder,"Will anyone read these pages?"

With regards,
Hemen Parekh
27 June 2013

Now as I approach my 90th birthday ( 27 June 2023 ) , I invite you to visit my Digital Avatar ( www.hemenparekh.ai ) – and continue chatting with me , even when I am no more here physically

Saturday, 27 September 2025

When Election Commission Moves Toward Real-Time Transparency, I Hear an Old Idea Come Alive

When Election Commission Moves Toward Real-Time Transparency, I Hear an Old Idea Come Alive

When Election Commission Moves Toward Real-Time Transparency, I Hear an Old Idea Come Alive

I read the recent coverage about the Election Commission planning faster, more transparent turnout updates ahead of the Bihar polls with a familiar mix of mild surprise and quiet satisfaction. The move — reported in Economic Times — to bring more timely turnout information to citizens and stakeholders feels like one of those rare moments when a public institution nudges closer to an idea I’d been pushing for years: make voting data live, auditable and trustworthy without compromising secrecy Election Commission plans faster, more transparent turnout updates ahead of Bihar polls.

I’ve long written about two complementary themes: one, the potential of digital tools to modernize voting (my VotesApp series) and two, the idea of an Electronic Audit Trail (EAT) to provide real-time, voter-verified signals that strengthen trust without reverting to fully manual systems. See my posts "Votes Audit… gives 99.9936%" and "Birth of a baby named VotesApp" where I sketched these ideas and the transparency they enable Votes Audit… gives 99.9936%, Birth of a baby named VotesApp.

That earlier line of thinking was not naïve optimism. It was a practical proposal born of the same impulse I now see in the Commission’s reported intent: if we can show broad turnout trends quickly and accurately, we remove fog and rumor that fuel distrust. When institutions deliver clean, verifiable updates, the political conversation becomes less about suspicion and more about substance.

Why faster turnout updates matter (and why I believed it years ago)

  • Transparency calms speculation: timely, authoritative turnout numbers reduce the space for wild claims and disinformation on social feeds.
  • Operational usefulness: administrators, parties, and observers can respond more effectively to on-ground bottlenecks when they see which areas are lagging.
  • Civic engagement: visible turnout momentum can encourage participation in places where voters feel their peers are showing up.

But there is an old caution I’ve repeated in many essays: transparency that looks like a scoreboard can change the game. Live or frequent updates can create a “horse race” effect — late voters in a constituency might alter behaviour if they perceive a bandwagon or a rout. That concern is why the design choices matter profoundly.

A few reflections and constraints I’d press upon anyone rolling out real-time turnout data

  • Keep the public data aggregated and anonymized: percentage turnout by booth/ward is useful; anything that hints at candidate-level direction or identifiable voter behaviour risks influence. The idea I sketched with EAT was explicit about no voter-identifying display while enabling a voter to see their own confirmation privately Votes Audit… gives 99.9936%.

  • Pace the updates with safeguards: frequent uploads of turnout percentages make sense, but they should be throttled, audited and subject to tamper-evident logs so that anomalous spikes can be investigated promptly.

  • Invite observers early: when I encouraged transparent trials of smartphone-based voting and booth apps I emphasized open observation and consensus-building — the same principle applies here. Independent observers and party agents should see the pipeline, not just the dashboard Birth of a baby named VotesApp.

  • Test and pilot: start with limited pilots and public reporting on learnings. India is not a laboratory for abrupt national rollouts; incremental, documented experiments build trust.

Why I feel a little validated — and why urgency remains

Seeing the ECI move toward faster turnout updates confirms a pattern I’ve long insisted on: technology, sensibly applied, can strengthen democratic trust rather than erode it. That earlier point — that we could have continuous, public-facing trend data without compromising privacy — feels less speculative today. At the same time, validation is not the same as completion. The politics around elections are intense; technical fixes without trust-building and transparent processes will fall short.

In short, faster turnout updates are a welcome step. They reflect an institutional appetite for transparency I’ve advocated for over nearly a decade. Now comes the harder part: implement with restraint, document everything, and make sure the transparency we promise does not inadvertently become a tool for manipulating behaviour.

I will watch the Bihar experiment closely, not out of technocratic curiosity alone but because when electoral institutions get the small things right — the timing, the granularity, the audit logs — the larger faith in democratic processes benefits.

References

Regards,
Hemen Parekh

Posted by

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)