dna edit: More power to the voter

The Supreme Court’s direction to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to include a “none of the above” (NOTA) option in electronic voting machines (EVMs) and ballot papers is fraught with immense repercussions for the political establishment. By allowing voters a fair option to not vote for candidates, the Supreme Court (SC) has increased the power of the vote double-fold. Just as votes indicate the performance of incumbents, negative votes can become a collective expression of an electorate’s disenchantment with the candidates fielded by parties.

While this provision already existed under Rule 49(O) of the Conduct of Election (CoE) Rules, 1961, voters had to record their abstainment by communicating it to the presiding officer. This was an obvious violation of the secret ballot principle which the apex court has rightly pointed out. The ECI was aware of this anomaly too. As early as December 10, 2001, the ECI had proposed an amendment in the CoE Rules to include the NOTA button. The proposal received the cold shoulder from the NDA government in power then.

The expectation from this judgment is that political parties will be forced to put up clean candidates for fear of rejection. However, the judgment, by itself, does not tantamount to a “right to reject” candidates. It is silent on what course the law should take if the NOTA numbers predominate. This would require amendments in the law; something political parties can be expected to oppose even though many parties have publicly welcomed the judgement. Irrespective of the right to reject not becoming law, NOTA can still become a game-changer in cleansing politics if it draws a significant chunk of the electorate.

Fears have been raised that NOTA will become an expression of the brand of anti-political feeling and cynicism visible during the civil society-led anti-corruption campaigns of 2011 and 2012. But giving such opinions a legitimate outlet does not destabilise democracy. On the contrary, the number of NOTAs will help understand voters and electoral politics better.

Fears have been raised that NOTA will undermine reservation for scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and women. A consistently high percentage of NOTA numbers across reserved constituencies in comparison to unreserved constituencies does not undermine the spirit of this judgment or the concept of right to reject. Instead, it would highlight the deep-seated biases that inhibit weaker sections from entering legislatures and civic bodies.

NOTA is in use in countries as diverse as France, Brazil and Bangladesh. In their judgment, the honourable SC judges predict a “gradual systemic change” where political parties will be forced to field candidates with integrity. But an unintended effect of the  NOTA will be its impact on anti-incumbency. Opposition parties which automatically benefited from anti-incumbency in previous elections would now have to persevere harder to persuade voters to opt for them instead of for NOTA.

In the current political scenario, this could rob the BJP of some votes. The SC’s role in correcting unconstitutionality in long-standing legislations tells us a lot about politics. Many recent judicial interventions like disqualifying convicted legislators could have been spearheaded by political parties too. The demand for negative voting stems from society’s desire to reform the system; not from a loss of faith in politics.