The Supreme Court ruled to include the option of NOTA in all
ballot systems. NOTA of None of the above is the right of voters to reject all
candidates in an election. NOTA is considered as an alternative to an earlier
procedure to reject a candidate – Section 49(O), Conduct of Elections Rules,
1961. The voter had to inform the presiding officer and ask for Form 17A to
cast his negative vote, which incidentally revealed the voter’s identity. NOTA
keeps the very basic principle of secret balloting intact.
However, the overall impact of introducing NOTA on the
election result is zero. Naught. Nil. Which is why it seems to be as good as an
option as a non-existent one. First of all, NOTA has no electoral value. A
senior EC official has said that even if the maximum share of votes is for
NOTA, the winning candidate will be chosen based on the rest of the votes. For
instance, if two candidates A and B receive 20% and 30% of the total votes
respectively and the NOTA’s share is 40%, candidate B takes home the crown because
NOTA’s 40% vote share amounts to nothing.
The only thing that NOTA contributes to is the reduction of
the total significant votes, not impacting the outcome of the election
whatsoever. If someone is adamant on pressing the NOTA button, his/her contribution
to the election will be as good if he/she didn’t even turn up to vote. It is
highly unlikely for a significant majority to stand in long queues just to
reject all the candidates when in the end their vote may not pose any threat to
the election of that very candidate they rejected. It’s pretty much like
working on a project with all your devotion knowing it won’t matter at all.
The main objective of democracy is to give citizens the
power to choose a candidate of their
choice. If every voter choses to reject all candidates, no one will get elected
which defeats the purpose of an election. Such a situation of rejection of
candidates by everyone will result in empty seats, null elections and will lead
to re-election, which will consume a major chunk out of the taxpayer’s money.
NOTA could have been a significant election reform had it
been negative voting. In a society where selfless favors are a rare occurrence,
it’s doesn’t make a good choice to provide the option to reject all options
available. It is highly irregular that someone would reserve a table at a fancy
restaurant just to look at the menu and reject all the options available.
NOTA essentially is equivalent to flipping off all the
political candidates in their face. But we do that on social media all through
the year nevertheless.
No comments:
Post a Comment