The Hindu Business Line : `None-of-the-above' — Encouraging choice or apathy?

THE Chief Election Commissioner, Mr T. S. Krishna Murthy, appears to have caught the imagination of the intelligentsia by proposing a unique choice for the voter — "none of the above" — at the end of the list of contestants in the electronic voting machine (EVM). A voter not satisfied with any of the contestants can "choose" no one, so to say. Well, on the face of it, the proposal may sound good. Yet, there are several imponderables. It raises questions that are disturbing to the healthy culture of voter participation and, thus, to the very future of democracy. Such a provision is not known to exist in the electoral systems of other democracies.

Why has the CEC in the first place suggested such a choice for the voters? Apparently, his suggestion is an answer to a very large percentage of non-voting in successive elections from 1952. The average voter turnout in the last 12 General Elections since 1952 has been about 60 per cent.

The highest turnout in any General Election so far was in 1984 with 64 per cent of the voters exercising their franchise. The lowest was in 1962 at 55 per cent. It was less than 60 per cent in the 1971, 1980 and 1996 elections. The polling percentage crossed 60 per cent in 1998 and reached 61.97 per cent but again came down to 59.99 per cent in 1999 elections.

In a parliamentary democracy, voters' participation is essential for a true reflection of the popular will. India is still a growing democracy, not fully developed or mature.

The country is still to be free from the ill-effects of having been a feudal society for long. India has not yet banished poverty, attained 100 per cent literacy and given the entire population facilities of basic health, sanitation and hygiene. But remarkably, though, the moment India became free, framers of the Constitution gave universal voting right to all. The literacy level in 1947 was a dismal 30 per cent or so. The Indian voter was fortunate in that universal franchise was granted to its adult population completing 21 years of age.

The Constitution was amended a few years ago to give voting rights to all those who complete 18 years. Because of India's battle against illiteracy and poverty, the bad effects of these maladies are reflected in the electoral politics.

The illiterate, rural population is terrorised by those wielding muscle and money power either to vote for particular candidates or not vote at all. And not all the educated and enlightened go to the polling booths to vote. Lethargy, lack of commitment, indifference and irresponsibility are the major factors preventing this section from exercising their franchise. One way of eliminating the travesty of popular will is for the electorate to vote in maximum, possible numbers. The voting percentages since the first General Election is a cause for concern.

In such a scenario, does the CEC's proposal really serve the cause of democracy? Does it not encourage voter's irresponsibility and justify apathy? Is the present non-voting by individuals tantamount to exercising the "none-of-the above" choice? What really are the ways left to improve voter participation?

Says Mr Prakash Javadekar, spokesman for the Bharatiya Janata Party: "The proposal seems to have been made without much thought to the consequences it is bound to result in. The very idea is ill-conceived and illogical. Already we have a high rate of non-voting that makes a mockery of the final results. It will encourage and even justify cynicism among a section of the so-called intelligentsia that do not already vote. It will result in a chaotic situation that is better avoided for the sake of safeguarding democracy."

According to Mr Anil Shastri of the Congress (I), the proposal is bound to make matters worse. "Look at our voting percentage, especially in urban areas that are supposed to be homes to the educated and enlightened. Apathy, indifference and sheer irresponsibility are the major causes of low turnout in any elections. This proposal will further erode the voting percentage and the final results will amount to travesty of popular will. I am afraid it will result in confusion worst confounded."

Mr D. Raja of the Communist Party of India is equally baffled by the proposal. "Where is the need for such a proposal in the already confused state of our electoral politics where a high percentage of non-voting is making a mockery of democracy. Let us look at the problem in its perspective. We have on one hand people who have no difficulty whatsoever in going to the booths to vote but still they do not for various reasons. On the other, we have large numbers of rural population who want to vote but are being prevented from voting by terror tactics of those with money and muscle power. Let us tackle this problem first."

What is the way out of this apparent logjam? One way out is to make voting compulsory. How this can be done under democracy is debatable. For, you cannot force anyone to vote in a democracy. It may infringe on the individual's right.

But the real solution lies in creating awareness among the people about the importance of voting in a democratic dispensation. It can be done only through value-based education from the beginning that would inculcate a sense of duty and responsibility among each citizen. This can happen only when the polity itself changes for the better and each and everyone is educated enough to realise his or her rights and duties.

(The author, a former Deputy Editor of PTI, is a New Delhi-based freelance journalist.)