ADR, is a civil society group that focuses on electoral reforms was established in 1999 by a group of professors from the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad.

In reaffirming its faith in the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs), the Supreme Court on Friday also expressed a refrain that petitioner Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) has attempted to discredit EVMs and cast a shadow on the electoral process.

“I have no hesitation to accept the submission of senior counsel for the ECI that reverting to the ‘paper ballot system’ of the bygone era, as suggested, reveals the real intention of the petitioning association to discredit the system of voting through the EVMs and thereby derail the electoral process that is underway, by creating unnecessary doubts in the minds of the electorate,” Justice Dipankar Datta wrote in his concurring opinion.

However, over the last two decades, ADR’s interventions in Court have led to several key electoral reforms. It has often been the Court, ADR and on some occasions the Election Commission too, that have batted for transparency and reforms even when the government has resisted the changes.

“I have serious doubts as regards the bona fides of the petitioning association when it seeks a reversion to the old order. Irrespective of the fact that in the past efforts of the petitioning association in bringing about electoral reforms have borne fruit, the suggestion put forth appeared inexplicable,” Justice Datta wrote.

“It is of immediate relevance to note that in recent years, a trend has been fast developing of certain vested interest groups endeavouring to undermine the achievements and accomplishments of the nation, earned through the hard work and dedication of its sincere workforce. There seems to be a concerted effort to discredit, diminish, and weaken the progress of this great nation on every possible frontier. Any such effort, or rather attempt, has to be nipped in the bud. No Constitutional court, far less this Court, would allow such an attempt to succeed as long as it (the court) has a say in the matter,” Justice Datta added.

ADR, is a civil society group that focuses on electoral reforms was established in 1999 by a group of professors from the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad. Since its inception, the group has been part of several interventions in the Court that have led to key changes in the electoral laws.

One of its first cases filed in 1999 was a plea seeking disclosure of a candidate’s criminal background, educational qualification and assets before the election. While the SC in 2002, allowed ADR’s plea, the Parliament then passed a legislation to undo the court’s verdict. However, in a landmark ruling in 2003, the SC struck down the law as unconstitutional, expanding on the significance of participatory democracy and restored its earlier judgement. It is this case that led to voters knowing the background of candidates.

ADR was also one of the petitioners in the SC’s 2013 landmark judgement that led to the inclusion of NOTA (None of the Above) option in the EVM. In this case, the Union had argued that since the right to vote is only a statutory right and not a fundamental right, a voter cannot be given the right to cast a negative vote. The SC had underlined that “it is equally vital to recollect that this statutory right is the essence of democracy” while allowing for a mechanism of negative voting.

In its last major intervention, ADR was one of the lead petitioners to challenge the electoral bonds scheme that was struck down by the Supreme Court in February 2024.