POLITICAL DIARY

New Delhi, 2 May 2009

System Against Ballot

PAPPU DID NOT VOTE AFTER ALL

Last week the Indian voter made clear his verdict in the ongoing election nautanki. When push came to shove, Pappu did not vote, saala. Notwithstanding the Herculean efforts made by the Election Commission, NGOs and media to get the aam aadmi to exercise his fundamental right to elect his ruler. Eye-catching newspaper ads, a poll-take off on popular Bollywood songs on TV and radio to lure the voter. But nothing has worked. As borne out by the voting pattern in the first three phases of the five-phase election. Exposing the fallacy of the Jai Ho India campaign, run by virtually every political party and candidate in the electoral fray.

True, the vote percentage in the first two phases averaged out to the 2004 elections. But the third phase especially Mumbai, India’s commercial Capital underscored that there was something indeed, rotten in the State of Denmark. Instead of reflecting the seething anger of the Mumbaikar post 26/11, shockingly the city recorded a low voter turnout of 41.5 per cent.

Why? Was it the searing heat that kept people indoors in Madhya Pradesh, UP, Bihar and Dravidian Andhra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala? The Naxalites fear in Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh? Was Maharashtra’s low percentage due to people opting for fun over the long weekend instead of exercising their vote? Or dismiss it as the middle-class’s dissatisfaction and not the aam janata’s discontent? 

While our netagan would have us believe that the drop in the vote percentage was all this and more. They are not only fooling themselves but the country as well. Think. What did they actually offer? Better governance? Accountability and transparency? Better candidates? Promises which would translate into reality? Ideology?  Not at all. It was the same ghisa-pita ashwasans, assurances that are mere pipe dreams, manifestos which are not even worth the paper they are printed on. The same politico-criminal candidates. Worse, not a single national issue.

What is a voter supposed to do when faced with a choice between the likes of Pappu Yadav and Shahbuddin?  Between Made in India Lalu, Mulayam and Mayawati fanning casteist and communal sentiments? A toss between Jayalalitha and Karrunanidhi’s Sri Lankan-Tamil politics? Between Congress’s Bharat Bulaand and BJP’s Bharat Nirman? A toss between Dynasty X and Dynasty Y?  All parties sounded the same and offered the same I-me-myself candidates. Like in the past there was nothing novel. Zilch. Thus, in disgust knowing that their vote would make no damn difference, the voter decided why bother? And take the trouble to go to the polling booths.

Clearly, the low percentage is a reflection of the peoples’ angst against our netagan. It is in a way a vote against the system. The tragedy of India is that this abstinence by the voter and his apathy to exercise his vote showcases that he has lost all hope of a change for a better quality of life and governance to make India’s democracy truly of the people, by the people and for the people.

Sadly, voting has been relegated to only choosing the lesser evil. Not about getting the right man for the right job. Like in other walks of life, education, employment, scholarship etc. For post-poll, people have no way of expressing their despair and resentment.

Clearly, with over 50 per cent of the electorate between 18-30 years, a middle-class numbering almost 50 million and the country boasting of a 64 per cent literacy rate, the time has come for introducing radical electoral reforms. Enough is enough. It is high time the voters got his Brahmsatra: the power to reject all candidates as not good enough. All it would take is a press of the button “None of the Above” at the end of the list on the electronic voting machine. If introduced, this will motivate even those voters to vote, who do not vote in the absence of a right candidate.

Though Rule 49-O of the Conduct of Election Rules 1961 states that citizens have the option to choose `none of the above', they can only record their views in a register. Not in the EVM. Arguably, if a voter has a right to vote, he should also have the right not to vote.

Recall, the Election Commission has been pursuing this idea with the Government for the last nine years. It has sought the Government clearance because the proposal needed an amendment to the Representation of People Act 1951. Without success. The Commission had recommended that the law should be amended to specially provide for negative/neutral voting. For this purpose, Rules 22 and 49B of the Conduct of Election Rules 1961 be suitably amended.

Not only that. An election would be declared null and void and a fresh poll ordered if the maximum votes polled rejected all the candidates. Adding insult to injury, those candidates rejected in the earlier round would be barred from contesting the repoll even though the “none of the above” button would not be there. According to Election Commissioner S.Y. Quraishi, the “reject” option is aimed at empowering the voter with a greater choice, as well as help tackle the groundswell of criticism with the polity.

The proposal is, indeed, a wise step in the right direction to ensure a truly representative Legislature. Over the years, a recalcitrant polity has wrought havoc. Immoral and unaccountable, it has misused and abused the voters trust, all at the taxpayers’ expense. Time and again, money and muscle power has kept good, deserving people away. Trust, the Government to continue stonewalling the proposal.

Left to itself it would prefer to shove the proposal into cold storage. Tragically, most politicians and candidates do not regard elections as merely a process that yields public office of government power. They use elections to amass wealth. Like politic, elections have become a business --- like businessmen politicians balk at the idea of controls, regulations and rejection. Thus, it makes sound business sense to negate this proposal.

Along with negative voting, voices have been raised over the citizens’ right to recall their non-functional and incompetent netas. Interestingly, Jayprakash Narayan wanted the right to recall introduced in the Constitution. He felt a mid-term poll was badly needed in a country like India. This would act like the Damocles sword over the MPs and MLAs and make them accountable to their voters. It would enable the people to assert themselves as the masters, recall candidates found wanting and elect others in their place. In fact, in 2003 a village in Madhya Pradesh wanted a referendum held midway. Dissatisfied with their Panchayat mukhiya, the villagers demanded his removal and the right to elect another in his place.

Not a few feel that minimum educational qualification should be made mandatory for a candidate. Arguably, if educational qualifications and age denomination are mandatory in jobs, why not in our leaders? Bluntly, can a billion-plus nation afford to have rank illiterates to frame rules, govern and make decisions that affect every aspect of our life?

What next? As bullets and thugs become the torchbearers of elections, we need to be resolute and not allow our shameless, self-serving netas to push the country more and more towards a feudal democracy. Political accountability is paramount. The voter must decide on who stands for unity, integrity and stability and who does not.

But at the same time we have to acknowledge a basic truth. People get the Government they deserve. Moreover, they need to realize their own responsibility and learn from past mistakes. After all, eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. We must not allow ourselves to be taken for granted any more.

Politics is bound to get dirtier so long as good people do not actively participate in national affairs. Time now to cry a halt to the aaj ke neta who are playing ducks and drakes with India, like the Pindaris of yester centuries. Or else not bemoan our fate. And like George Burns asserted: Too bad, the only people who know how to run a country are busy driving taxis and cutting hair! ---- INFA

 (Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)