If the only choice you have is a choice between the bad and the worse, then that is no choice at all.
Sadly, very often, the Indian voter is faced with this very choice. Should I choose the old lady with the criminal record? Or would the murder-accused old man make a better leader? Who should my vote go to? I think this is unacceptable.
The constitution of India allows for a provision (section 49-0) that allows you to go to a voting booth and do a no-vote.
This provision has remained largely pointless. A no-vote is a strong statement agreed, but in effect it is a vote gone waste.
This is why the following is interesting:
The Supreme Court on Wednesday wanted to know from the Central Government why the right to vote should not include “right to not to vote” or what is called non-voting.
Hearing a PIL filed by the Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), which sought separate slots in EVMs or ballot paper giving a voter the option of “none of the above” if he or she did not want to vote for any of the candidates, the Supreme Court Bench repeatedly asked the Government counsel, “Does right to voting include right to not to vote.”
The Indian Express report goes on to say:
According to the PUCL, Section 49(O) was violative of the Constitutional provisions guaranteed under Article 19 (1(a) Freedom of Speech and Expression) and Article 21 (Right to Liberty) and violated the secret ballot concept.
While the Government was opposed to the plea, the Election Commission appeared open to the idea of having a specific provision, in which a voter has the option of rejecting the candidate. The EC’s counsel, Meenakshi Arora, who will present the poll panel’s view on Thursday, said this in a query from the Bench.
You can read the full report here. There are a number of reasons why lending actionable legitimacy to the 49-0 clause is a good idea.
If, in a given constituency, the number of no-votes is significant, the Election Commission might be forced to review the options that the voters are faced with. This might mean cleaner candidates and in effect, cleaner politics.
Secondly, for those who don’t vote and cite unavailability of suitable candidates as a reason, this might be the trigger that finally launches a dormant vote bank. People who don’t like the way things are run and don’t know what to do about it.
A dissatisfied vote bank like this will have to be catered to. And that will require candidates to actually hear the urban, educated crowd (a minority) out.
What do you think? Do you think 49-0 is a good idea? Or would you label it a waste of time?
49-0 is a very good idea. And I wanted to exercise this right when I went to vote today.This is the first time I’m voting as I turned 18 just last year. But when I asked the polling officer he as well as some of the other officers, they laughed at me and said that there is no such provision and that I had to vote. This either shows their ignorance or the fact that they want one of the contestants to win. So, I had absolutely no choice but to vote. On top of that, there is no provision in the EVM to vote for no one. So even if I would have been able to cast a no-vote, everyone would know about it and my right to secrecy as to whom I vote for, is denied. Something must be done about this and all of us have to make a stand to ensure that we, as educated voters, have the right to be able to exercise our powers to the fullest.