Why voters' list in India's IT capital a 'comedy of errors'?
Bangalore, Feb 5: Violation of election norms is a routine affair in remote rural parts where muscle power of party cadres dominates. But the way the voters' list in one of India's technologically developed states has found to be flouting all rules, one wonders how the world's biggest democracy survives if basic issues making up its foundation are so pathetically managed, even in this age of advanced technology.
According to an article published in bangalore.citizenmatters.in, the chief electoral officer revealed a new set of voters' list last month and downloading the lists using a software programme and extracting data from them was disabled by converting the files into image files. However, a software firm managed to manually download the files and extract the voter records data for 27 constituencies in Bangalore, considered the country's Silicon Valley, and it was shocking to see how norms were flouted at will in those electoral data.
Data model violation
According to the article, the Instruction Manual for Standardization of Electoral Roll Database (Version 1.0) published by the Election Commission (EC) of India three years ago lays down conventions on database schema and naming. The voter lists of Karnataka were nowhere near to abiding by the law.
ID card number
The Electoral Registration Officers' handbook says the number of EPIC, which is a key part of the voting procedure, is prepared in a way that it acts as a permanent unique identity for each elector and thus is very important. But in reality, it was found that about 11,000 EPIC numbers were duplicated. While the same number has been awarded to more than one person, the same data have been repeated with another serial number or in another file. Moreover, while nearly 23,000 IDs were arbitrarily numbered without actually complying with the set standard, over 90,000 EPIC number fields were found to be blank!
House number
The guidelines say no house number should be more than 10 characters, but it was found that over 66,000 house numbers were longer than the prescribed limit. Over 1,600 records did not have any house number at all while nearly numbers of 53,000 house were written as ‘.', ‘-'. Nearly 40,000 houses had more than 10 voters ach, while 112 houses had more than 100 voters each. One house alone had 452 voters while another had 347 voters! Nearly 9,00,000 houses had a single voter each.
Name of voters and relatives
The EC asks not to use prefixes like Dr, Prof., but very few cared. Nearly 2,000 voters were described as ‘Late'. Aliases of names had been used in several places while 1,431 records did not have voter names at all. While 157 names were one-character long, over 5,600 records did not have relative's name or were one-character long. The spellings of the names were also not consistent in several places.
Relation types
A close observation of the data showed that more than 13,000 voters had more than one wife. Over 10,000 cases showed the age difference between parent and child to be less than 13 years. Nearly 1,900 husbands were shown as female and the name of the voters and relatives were found to be same in 1,482 cases.
Age
As
per
the
EC,
the
age
of
voting
is
between
18
and
120.
The
data
showed
more
than
500
voters
aged
below
18,
including
39
voters
who
are
zero-year
old.
Ninety-six
voters
were
found
to
be
above
120
while
17
people
were
over
200-year-old!
If
this
was
shocking,
then
try
this:
Voter
having
EPIC#
XUL4087888
was
shown
to
be
4,818-year-old.
Sex
A sample survey showed some records where the males and females were interchanged. One person was even shown male and female at two serials, namely, STZ0267013 and STZ3778412, the article said.
Voters' address
Again,
there
was
no
consistent
pattern
followed.
The
same
name
was
spelt
differently
at
different
places.
If
we
can
not
make
use
of
technology
to
prepare
error-free
electoral
data
while
sitting
at
the
country's
IT
capital,
then
there
is
no
point
in
accusing
some
of
the
backward
states,
saying
they
can
not
manage
fair
elections.
The Chief Election Commissioner said last year that the EC would stress clean electoral roll and hassle-free registration and would make use of technology, but yet things are so pathetically lagging behind after so many months. Too much information is being managed manually and without any care. There is no dearth in technology-based and professional firms in Bangalore to ensure a better electoral data but is anybody willing to take a call?
Our democracy is still managed manually. Who will change it if we don't?