The Ministry of Science and Technology (MoST) and the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) are once again at loggerheads over the issue of electronic voting machines (EMVs).
The ministry has refused to provide the said machines to the commission for usage in the upcoming local government elections in Islamabad. It had previously displayed working prototypes of EVMs but upon the commission’s refusal to use one manufactured by a private company, it straight out refused to provide any machines.
Refusing to provide the said machines, the ministry wrote a letter in response to ECP’s letter, stating that it does not have the capacity to produce EVMs on its own, but rather a private company had manufactured it for them. Moreover, it added, the ECP is legally obligated to procure the machines.
MoST asked ECP to start the process of procuring machines for the upcoming polls and offered to provide space in PCSIR for the EVM project.
It offered ECP all legal assistance on the matter. It pointed out that the commission should issue tenders for purchasing the machines.
Read ECP directs ministry to ‘follow procedure’ for EVMs purchase
The ministry said that they envisioned the machines, but they do not manufacture them themselves, rather they proved that machines can be locally produced.
It said that they requested the chief election commissioner to procure the machines, and ECP can procure whichever machine it finds to be better.
MoST also pointed out that their job is to facilitate ECP, and they had offered space for storage of the said machines.
It is worth noting here that the ECP had asked MoST to provide 3,900 EVMs for upcoming polls in Islamabad. However, this letter is tantamount to a U-turn by Federal Minister for Science and Technology Shibli Faraz, who had earnestly offered the machines in the past.
The letter not only rendered Faraz’s claims unsubstantiated, but it has nearly jeopardized the Islamabad local bodies polls as well.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ