evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Braille-Enabled EVMs — India's Tactile Ballot Access for Blind and Low-Vision Voters

India · New Delhi · See the India profile · See the New Delhi profile

Evidence: Descriptive / self-reported Top 61% 68/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

India's Election Commission embosses Braille signage on electronic voting machines and issues Braille voter ID cards, letting blind and low-vision citizens vote unassisted — though critics note voters still can't verify their vote was recorded correctly.

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
Election Commission of India
Period
2004–present
Keywords
elections, disability rights, public administration

Context

Since around 2004, India's Election Commission has worked with EVM manufacturers Bharat Electronics and Electronics Corporation of India to add embossed Braille signage to balloting units nationwide, alongside Braille Elector Photo Identification Cards, formalised in the Commission's 2018 Strategic Framework on Accessible Elections.

Results

Embossed Braille has expanded independent voting access for millions of print-disabled citizens, but journalists and disability advocates document that not every EVM is Braille-enabled, many blind voters cannot read Braille, and the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail provides no audio readback to confirm a vote was registered correctly.

Implementation
Indicative cost
High (€500k–€5M)
Time to results
Long (> 3 years)
Staffing & skills
Election Commission of India, Bharat Electronics Limited, Electronics Corporation of India

Conditions for success

  • Braille literacy support for voters
  • Audio-verification device for the paper audit trail

Common failure modes

  • No audio confirmation that the intended vote was registered
  • Uneven Braille-enablement across the EVM fleet

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Similar practices you may find useful