None of the above option is good but will prove useless

Whenever there’s talk of giving people the right to use the “none of the above” button in electronic voting machines, the usual argument is it would be misused. No one would even go to booths to cast his/her vote. There’s no proof of this though.

The order of the apex court is full of noble intentions but in reality it would probably remain useless. An argument often put by the public at large is: why will we go out to vote when there is no candidate we want to vote for?

Hardly will anyone go and stand in a queue under the scorching sun to just press the “none of the above” button. People here are so lazy to exercise their new right. The apex court wants to give people greater choice but it is unlikely to make much of a difference to the electoral process. In fact, the electoral process would be in a shambles because of this verdict. The new provision of the right to reject provided by the apex court is not convincing and it will have several ill-effects. An election is held to elect somebody but here, in India, people will misuse it and won’t elect anybody.

Rule 490 of the Conduct of Elections Rules 1961 gives the voter an option to cast a null vote in an election by approaching the presiding officer. But there is no secrecy left in this. 

If the rule of probability plays out and no candidate gets an adequate number of votes to win an election, the election commission or the aggrieved party will go to the court and seek necessary permission to conduct a re-election. So, doors of litigation will open again and pendency of cases will increase.
(As told to Kanu Sarda)

Subhash C Kashyap constitution expert and former Lok Sabha secretary general