EC Must Explain Surge in Maharashtra Turnout Data After Polls Closed, Legitimacy of Mandate at Stake

5 months ago 60

Voter turnout discrepancies in Maharashtra question legitimacy of mandate: Economist and Commentator, Parakala Prabhakar, to Karan Thapar for The Wire. .......................................... The well-known economist and current affairs commentator, Parakala Prabhakar, has drawn attention to mystifying, inexplicable and disconcerting discrepancies in the official turnout figures put out by the Election Commission in Maharashtra which, he says, “question the legitimacy of the mandate”. Dr. Parakala is also Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman’s husband. Very simply, when polls closed at 5.00 p.m. on the 20th, the turnout was 58.22%. By 11.30 p.m. on the same day, after accommodating people presumably waiting in the queue to vote at 5.00 p.m., it increased to 65.02%. Hours before the counting started on the 23rd it was put at 66.05%. This means that the turnout increased by 7.83% after polls closed at 5.00 p.m. Dr. Parakala estimates that this is, in terms of the number of people, an increase of almost 76 lakhs. How could such an enormous number have been accommodated in the six hours between polls closing at 5.00 p.m. and 11.30 p.m. on the same day, when the final person waiting in the queue voted? To illustrate how impossible this actually would be, Dr. Parakala cited the following example. Let’s, for arguments sake, assume there were a thousand people waiting to vote in a booth when polling stopped at 5.00 p.m. Because they had arrived before 5.00 p.m. they would have the right to vote. If you assume one minute per person to vote – but actually it should be a lot more i.e. closer to 4 or 5 – it would take a thousand minutes for these people to vote. A thousand minutes is 16.6 hours. The problem is between 5.00 p.m. and 11.30 p.m. there’s only six and a half hours. So there is no way a thousand people could have voted in that time. How then could 76 lakhs have done so? This cries out for an explanation from the Election Commission. But the Election Commission is silent. Dr. Parakala said it hasn’t bothered to even acknowledge memorandums submitted by citizens raising this question. The contrast with the Jharkhand turnout is equally illuminating. There were two phases of polling in that state. In phase one, at 5.00 p.m. the turnout was 64.86%. By 11.30 p.m. it increased to 66.48%, which is just a 1.79% increase. That’s very different to the nearly 8% increase in Maharashtra. In phase two, at 5.00 p.m. the turnout was 67.59%. By 11.30 p.m. that have become 68.45%. That’s an increase of only 0.86%. Again, that’s hugely different to the nearly 8% increase in Maharashtra. So the first question is how come the turnout didn’t increase in Jharkhand after polls-closed the way it did in Maharashtra? Again, there’s no explanation from the Election Commission. Let’s go one step further. In Maharashtra, where the turnout increased by nearly 8%, the NDA won. In Jharkhand, where the turnout increased by less than 2% and 1%, the India Block won. That raises the question is there a link between the increase in turnout and who wins? It seems, prima facie, that where there is a large increase in the post poll-closing turnout the NDA wins. Where there is a small or minimal increase the India Block wins. Dr. Parakala has spotted similar outcomes in the Haryana elections, during the recent Vidhan Sabha elections, and in UP, during the Lok Sabha elections. In Haryana, the post poll-closing vote share increased by 6.7% and the BJP won. In UP, the post poll-closing vote share increased by under 0.5% and the Opposition won the majority of seats. So what Dr. Parakala spotted in Maharashtra and Jharkhand seems to have happened earlier in UP and Haryana. I will stop there. The issues Dr. Parakala addresses have been laid out. They are how do we explain the astonishing 7.83% post poll-closing turnout in Maharashtra? Why did nothing similar happen in Jharkhand? Is there a link between the increase in post poll-closing turnout and who wins? Doesn’t the outcome in Haryana (Vidhan Sabha) and UP (Lok Sabha) suggest something similar? What is the explanation for all of this? If it’s not explained adequately will that not create suspicion in people’s minds? Will that suspicion not, in turn, fuel damaging speculation that will vitiate our system of voting and our democracy? Dr. Parakala talks about all of these issues. Here is the link to the interview: Join The Wire's Youtube Membership and get exclusive content, member-only emojis, live interaction with The Wire's founders, editors and reporters and much more. Memberships to The Wire Crew start at Rs 89/month. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChWtJey46brNr7qHQpN6KLQ/join

The Vision and Mission of Upilink News - Empowering Informed Citizens

Welcome to Upilink News, your gateway to unbiased news, investigative journalism, and a platform free from government censorship. At Upilink, we believe in the power of information to empower citizens, fostering a well-informed society capable of making informed decisions.

Our platform, hosted at www.news.upilink.in, is meticulously curated to provide users with a reliable source of news, steering clear of propaganda and ensuring the delivery of objective reporting.

The Need for Upilink News

In an era where information is abundant but often tainted with bias and misinformation, the need for a trustworthy news source has never been more critical. Upilink News recognizes this necessity and strives to fill the gap by offering a carefully curated selection of news from diverse, reputable sources.

Our commitment to unbiased reporting and investigative journalism distinguishes us as a beacon of truth in the digital news landscape.

Our Unique Approach

What sets Upilink News apart is our meticulous selection process for news sources.

We prioritize transparency, accountability, and reliability in our curation, ensuring that only the most credible and unbiased reports make it to our platform.

Our team of experienced journalists and fact-checkers work tirelessly to sift through the noise and present users with news that stands up to scrutiny.

The Role of Investigative Journalism

Investigative journalism is at the heart of Upilink News. We understand that a well-functioning democracy relies on an informed citizenry, and investigative reporting plays a pivotal role in uncovering the truth. By supporting and promoting investigative journalism, we aim to contribute to a more transparent and accountable society.

Sustaining Upilink News - Your Support Matters

Free Access for All

At Upilink News, we firmly believe that access to information should be a fundamental right for everyone. Therefore, our platform is entirely free to use, allowing users from all walks of life to stay informed without any financial barrier.

Donations - Fueling Independent Journalism

To sustain our commitment to unbiased reporting and investigative journalism, we rely on the generosity of our users. Your donations go directly towards supporting our team, maintaining our infrastructure, and enabling us to continually improve and expand our coverage.

By contributing, you become a vital part of the Upilink community, driving the mission to keep information free and accessible.

Advertisement - Balancing Sustainability

In addition to donations, we embrace advertisements as a means of generating revenue to support Upilink News.

In conclusion, Upilink News is more than just a news aggregator; it's a commitment to empowering citizens through unbiased information.

Join us in our mission, explore the diverse and credible news on our platform, and consider supporting us through donations. Together, let's build a community that values truth, transparency, and the power of an informed citizenry.