Embedded Files
MARCH 2021 Download this Article
Background
Democracy has functioned with the primary assumption that all candidates are the best choice. Once elected, they will act only in the best interest of the people they represent.
It remains an assumption. The consequences of bad candidate winning make the constituents discontented with the electoral process. Voters feel that they have to choose between the devil and the deep blue sea.
People, in general, are supportive of the institutions but not the people in the institution. It is the situation in India. People want mature Democracy in all shapes and forms but disgruntled with the candidates participating in the elections.
In the absence of NOTA, the voters chose not to turn up to vote or vote with apathy. Other methods to show discontent when NOTA was not available were to blank votes and abstention.
The reason for this apathy was disinterest, misinformation about issues, confusion, or even resigning to fate.
NOTA has solved that universal problem of choosing a bad candidate amongst the worse.
NOTA – short form of "None of the Above" has been in the democratic process worldwide for some time now. So, where did the need for NOTA arise, and what does it signify about Democracy.
NOTA is a vote against all the choices on offer. It is a tool to give a clear message about the status of the fielded candidates.
It helps voters define their choice, and in-process NOTA is also defining the voter's behaviour towards the democratic process.
As a discreet, informative signal to the political system, it Communicates displeasure with a clear intent of the voter.
In 2013, the Supreme court of India passed a landmark judgement. It declared:
"For Democracy to survive, it is essential that the best available men should be chosen as people's representatives for proper governance of the country.
This can be best achieved through men of high moral and ethical values, who win the elections on a positive vote. Thus, in a vibrant democracy, the voter must be given an opportunity to choose none of the above [...] Democracy is all about choice.
This choice can be better expressed by giving the voters an opportunity to verbalise themselves unreservedly and by imposing least restrictions on their ability to make such a choice.
By providing NOTA button in the Electronic Voting Machines, it will accelerate the executive political participation in the present state of democratic system and the voters in fact will be empowered."
(PUCL vs Union of India, 2013, p43-44).
According to the Indian constitution, Section 79 (d) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, it recognises "electoral right" to also include the right to "refrain from voting at an election".
India's NOTA is not a new or first of its kind experiment. The only thing to be seen is the scope and utility of this option that voters take in bringing the best candidates into electoral politics.
Case: NOTA 1.0 already playing a dominant role in Indian elections
For the sake of clarity in our discussion, we are naming the current version of NOTA as NOTA 1.0. The effect of this NOTA version is barely understood, and least studied part of Democracy.
As it has a long-term impact, doing a full review now is complicated. Considering this information gap and constraint, the Indian voters and pro-democracy activists have undertaken a bold step to bring NOTA into the system.
In subsequent elections after 2013, in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, NOTA has influenced about 30 seats. Over the years, the option of NOTA is used by many more voters.
Though it has not been able to get a majority in any constituency, it has secured more votes than the many constituencies' victory margins. An interpretation of these statistics lies in NOTA's ability to change the destiny of the winner.
Here are few examples in India where NOTA has affected the outcome.
In an expression of public outrage, A. Raja, accused of a 2G scam, lost to the AIADMK candidate, and NOTA emerged third. In the 2014 general elections, the 2G scam and corruption were at the peak of discontent.
In the 2014 elections, 6 million Indians voted NOTA, which was 1.08% of the total voters.
2017:
In Gujarat elections, 18 constituencies, NOTA polled the third largest vote share after BJP and Congress. Also, NOTA's total vote share was lesser only to BJP, Congress, and some Independent Candidates.
2018:
In Karnataka Assembly Elections, NOTA polled more votes than some national parties such as CPI(M) and BSP.
In 2019, 1.04% voted NOTA though in volumes, this higher number higher than 2014 numbers. According to the Election Commission of India, Bihar and Assam recorded the highest number of NOTA choices – above 2% and Sikkim 0.65%, respectively.
In Madhya Pradesh, the NOTA crossed the victory margin in 22 constituencies and toppled four sitting ministers. Overall, the gap between BJP and Congress vote share was just 0.1%, while NOTA had a 1.4% vote share.
2021 Petition for interpretation of NOTA 1.0 votes
Till now - the NOTA 1.0 vote could never win due to the first-past-the-post system, and it has no impact on the allocation of legislative seats.
As a democratic process, while NOTA was significant, there is no rule to assign an electoral value if NOTA wins. It meant that always a candidate would get the position, even if NOTA had the largest vote share.
As a result, the quality of candidates still lacks; rather, it is pathetic, as shown by ADR research.
There continues a missing link between NOTA getting the highest vote share and its consequences to other candidates. Even if NOTA was the winner, still it wasn't.
The gap in interpretation of NOTA will be fulfilled by NOTA 2.0 if the petition is heard favourably by the Supreme Court of India.
The petition has requested that candidates losing to NOTA should not be allowed to contest in the fresh election as a punishment.
Like the maximum number of votes makes a winning candidate – similarly, NOTA's top vote share should reject and replace all the contesting candidates. Hence, a need for fresh elections.
It is also argued that constituency might remain unrepresented for some time – which is still better than lousy candidate representing it.
The petition's objective is to give citizens the right to choose the best candidate from best rather than best from worst candidates.
Hence, the Supreme Court of India has issued a notice to the Election Commission and the Central government to respond to this public interest litigation.
The petition is demanding re-election in that constituency if NOTA exceeds all the candidates.
It is a long-term process of maturing the Indian Democracy. While a healthy democracy has multiple parameters to measures like voting percentage, the number of candidates with diverse ideology – similarly, methods like the right to reject and right to recall are also important ones too.
Possible Positive Effects of NOTA 2.0
Current NOTA 1.0 gives just an ambiguous message about voter's apathy. NOTA 2.0 will provide the voters with a consumption utility of their action.
Voters will get a direct result of their activity and feel the worth of voting NOTA. With the interpretation of NOTA calling for fresh elections, the voters will also see the validity of their choice.
Quality of candidates will make healthier Democracy and welfare of the citizens definitive. As a result, the NOTA's interpretation to void the election will compel the political parties to field worthy candidates.
We often hear that a person is suited best in the parliament, but winnability is a question. We also hear that good candidate are not willing to get into electoral politics as crooks crowd it. All these shortcomings of an election will slowly come to an end.
Currently, parties across the board don't hold intra-party elections. They are nominated, or helicopter dropped depending on the winnability and political manoeuvre. NOTA 2.0 will also improve the quality of intraparty Democracy and hence the campaign.
It is required in India, where NOTA has the potential to make the races bipartisan and non-polar. The candidates will be seen as agents of providing benefits to society rather than seeking support for their party.
They will start representing the people rather than being a candidate imposed by the party. In India, many candidates win because they belong to a particular party that has a populist leader. Therefore, their relevance to the constituency means nothing in their win.
NOTA will turn that equation in elections to voter vs candidate rather than voter vs party.
Why NOTA 2.0 will change the course of Democracy in India?
It will stimulate parties for putting up a better quality of candidates.
NOTA winning and fresh elections demonstrates direct result – hence the majority of voters who are disgruntled and have apathy towards the issues will now participate and increase genuine turnout.
Voters will have deeper participation in the issues that matter to them most. In case they don't like the choices offered, they can call for fresh elections.
Overall, voters will feel empowered, and parties have to be more committed towards their constituents.
India adopts new things at a very rapid rate – if it is considered as modern and fast to yield result.
India has an average turnout of 60%. In the elections which had high visibility – the turnout had been around 70% - 80%. Participation rates in Indian polls tend to be high. With NOTA 2.0, there is a greater chance that voters involvement will get a boost.
The NOTA has the potential to activate the low polling areas like the Naxal controlled areas. They can now vote and reject the fielded candidates.
In turn, rejecting and replacing candidates starts their participation in the Democracy and brings them into society's mainstream. Any participation in the democratic process by the country's violence-torn regions is vital to resolving a crisis.
Examples from around the globe:
People worldwide have used methods to convey their discontent with the list of candidates in the fray.
In the UK, where NOTA type system does not exist, there have been instances where individuals have changed their names to include "None of the Above" in the ballot.
They did this to enable the voters to reject all the candidates. In a way, if a citizen is taking these extreme steps to convey their displeasure, it is a failure of the democratic procedure as followed across the world.
Here are some of the names and methods used by democracies for NOTA.
Indonesia - (kotak kosong, empty box)
France – Vote Blanc, where (NOTA) has been used extensively by older, better educated, active community members and politically engaged voters.
Same with Russia (Против всех, "against all") and Ukraine (Проти всіх, "against all").
Spain and other Latin American countries – Vote Blanco
Bulgaria introduced a 'none of the above option. In the presidential elections, it received 5.59% of the vote in the first round and 4.47% in the run-off.
NOTA is protest voting and available in some form or the other in Austria, Denmark, and Norway.
Although there is no option of NOTA in Canada, individuals can still go to the polling booth and register themselves as "declining to Vote".
Different methods are available in Argentina and Poland to convey their protest against all the candidates.
In the state of Nevada, the USA has NOTA since 1976. The NOTA percentage has increased to 10% over the time of 30 years.
Future:
Usually, high voter turnout means that people are already passionate about their voting preferences, and therefore there is a chance that NOTA may not be their choice.
It has been the observation in Nevada elections but may not be so in India. NOTA is still a hypothesis in India. The maximum vote share it has got is below 2%. It is still early days.
Therefore, only time will tell the actual effect of NOTA 2.0 on voter's interest and turnout, though confidence is high.
Support Us - It's advertisement free journalism, unbiased, providing high quality researched contents.
Google Sites
Report abuse