The most important takeaway from the 2017 Assembly elections in Gujarat is that the BJP has won for the sixth time running. This is clearly a very significant achievement. However, the 2017 Gujarat election had a number of other significant takeaways, some of which have the potential of impacting national politics.

COMMERCIAL BREAK
SCROLL TO CONTINUE READING

This is the first time that the BJP has failed to cross the Rubicon of 100 seats. Its tally in 1995, when this winning spree began, was 121. It came down to 117 in 1998, went up to 127 in 2002, and was 115 in 2012.  The fact that this was also the first time that it was in power at the Centre makes it even more telling. This does take away some shine from the otherwise remarkable victory.

The second significant development was the rise of youth as was visible in the coming together of Hardik Patel, Jignesh Mevani, and Alpesh Thakor. Given the estimates that more than 50 per cent of India’s population is below the age of 25 and more than 65 per cent  is below the age of 35, the emergence of youth leadership should not be surprising. But the way it gained prominence in Gujarat was almost unprecedented. Their joint mobilisation was of course caste-oriented. It has been speculated as to what would have been the final result had Muslims had joined this combination. Also, the temple visits of the then Congress Vice President, Rahul Gandhi, may have created some hesitation in the minds of the Muslim voters.

The third highlight is the clear emergence of the rural-urban divide. BJP’s performance in urban areas despite the noise that had been made in some of the same locations on the ill effects of demonetisation and GST, shows that the party continues to be an urban phenomenon. The backlash in rural areas, particularly led by farmers, possibly presents the opposition parties with an opportunity that they might be able to capitalise on in the future. Some signs of mobilisation of farmers as a national force are visible. If these gains can be consolidated, it may become a major rallying point in the future.

Now let’s discuss the two, arguably, most important issues which have a bearing on all future elections. The first of these is the role of the Election Commission of India (ECI). Never since 1991, when the ECI came into prominence, has the role of the regulator been so much in question as during and before the Gujarat elections. The hullabaloo over the EVMs apart, the misgivings began even before the dates of the Gujarat election were announced. As a matter of fact, it was the ‘non-announcement’ of the dates of the Gujarat election that triggered doubts about the hard-earned credibility of the ECI. And when the elections were finally announced and reasons were given for not announcing the dates earlier, it only worked to compound the confusion. This created an atmosphere in which all actions of the ECI concerning the Gujarat election were looked at with suspicion.

The misgivings that apparently came up about EVMs during the UP local elections added fuel to the fire. Hardly any of the commentators realised or seemed to know that the elections to local bodies are conducted by the State Election Commissions, which are independent constitutional bodies under Articles 243K and 243ZA of the Constitution of India, enacted vide the 73rd and 74th amendments to the Constitution. While some of the State Election Commissions hire some EVMs from the Election Commission of India, several of them also procure them independently from other sources. It is absolutely clear that the ECI does not have anything to do with the panchayat and municipal elections but whenever there are issues related to these elections, the general perception focuses, wrongly, on the ECI.

Notwithstanding the above, it seems to be widely believed that the moral stature of the ECI in the public eye stands diminished today than it was before the Gujarat election was ‘not announced’. This is sad. Credibility is extremely hard to gain but very easy to lose. ECI will now have to work very hard to regain what it seems to have lost during the Gujarat election. It is in the national interest to enable and assist the ECI to regain its credibility. The political establishment can assist by ensuring that the appointments of the Chief Election Commissioner and the Election Commissioners are done by a collegium in which the Opposition has a definite role. The lead in this has to be taken by the government of the day but the opposition parties need to take up and pursue this issue with determination and in partnership with the ruling party.

The last important outcome of the Gujarat election is the number of people who have voted for None Of The Above (NOTA). NOTA received the highest chunk of votes after BJP and Congress, more than any other political party. In 30 constituencies of Gujarat, NOTA received more votes than the victory margin. Out of these 30 constituencies, BJP candidates were elected in 15, Congress candidates in 13, and independent candidates in two. In the two constituencies where independent candidates were elected, BJP candidates polled the second highest votes. This means that both BJP and Congress lost 15 seats each where NOTA got more votes than the victory margin.

NOTA got 1.8 per cent votes in Gujarat which is the second highest so far. The highest percentage for NOTA so far has been 2.48 which it got in Bihar 2015 elections, almost right after the NOTA button was introduced in EVMs in compliance with a Supreme Court judgement. The Supreme Court expressed the rationale for NOTA in the following words: “When the political parties will realize that a large number of people are expressing their disapproval with the candidates being put up by them, gradually there will be a systemic change and the political parties will be forced to accept the will of the people and field candidates who are known for their integrity”.

The author is a former Professor, Dean, and Director In-charge of Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad. Views expressed are personal.