ECI Declares ECInet Software A ‘Commercial Confidence’ Matter
ECI principal secretary A.K. Pathak said the information sought was exempted from disclosure.
Hyderabad: Rejecting an RTI application, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has declined to disclose the name and version of the ECINet software, citing provisions relating to commercial confidence, trade secrets and intellectual property.
Responding to an RTI application filed by a Telangana voter and Special Intensive Revision (SIR) activist M.A. Mujeeb Ayyub from Karimnagar, ECI principal secretary A.K. Pathak said the information sought was exempted from disclosure.
“The information sought is related to commercial confidence, trade secrets and intellectual property matters and is therefore exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (d) of RTI Act, 2005,” Pathak stated in his reply.
The Commission stated that “no new software has been developed or procured for the SIR exercise”.
Mujeeb had sought details of the software, application, algorithm or artificial intelligence (AI) platform used by the ECI during the SIR of electoral rolls to identify errors, anomalies or inconsistencies in voter records.
He also sought information on whether the software flagged voter records for verification, correction or deletion, and the procedure followed after such records were identified.
The application further sought details on whether AI, machine learning, predictive analytics or automated decision-support systems were used at any stage of the SIR exercise.
The Commission, however, declined to provide the requested details, including information on safeguards against false positives, incorrect identification of anomalies or wrongful flagging of genuine voters. “The information sought is a clarification which does not come under the information as per Section 2 (f) of RTI Act, 2005,” the ECI official stated.
Mujeeb also sought to know which authority was responsible for reviewing or approving anomalies identified by the software or AI platform before action was taken on a voter's record. In its reply, the Commission stated that electoral registration officers (EROs) decided on the inclusion or exclusion of voters based on facts and records.
Dissatisfied with the response, Mujeeb said he would shortly file an appeal before the First Appellate Authority, Principal Secretary T.C. Kom.
“They have quoted wrong sections and are trying to conceal the information. This is nothing but an attempt to keep the voters in the dark. I will be approaching the appellate authority as part of my quest to uncover the truth,” Mujeeb told Deccan Chronicle.