Not an option

The general elections are not so general, after all — the binaries are more defined, the politics more divisive in 2014 than ever before. In an electoral climate such as this, the inclusion of the NOTA option — None of The Above — for the first time in the Lok Sabha polls, should have been particularly welcome. The choice to not choose has been hard won. And yet it turns out that, like laws without teeth and leaders without backbones, NOTA offers the kind of token relief that sustains the illusion of a true democracy where there is none. What good is protest if it doesn’t have the power to force the review of bad decisions, or, better still, override them? How is hitting the button for one of the weakest candidates (to make a dent in the tally of votes cast in favour of a frontrunner) any different from casting a scratch vote?

The larger question, however, is not whether NOTA is politically inert, but whether it is harming the system it is meant to protect. Some might argue that its mere presence on the EVM machine has engendered a more aware, more responsible vote, and compelled even voters who recognise its powerlessness to pick a candidate. But surely that’s no recompense for a citizen who exercises his franchise, choosing not to abstain from voting to remonstrate instead through NOTA? A compromise is a compromise. Another half-measure to fill the bottomless chalta hai bucket designed to absolve the average Indian of any guilt.

While the total NOTA votes for the ongoing elections are yet to be tabulated, consider the percentage of such ballots cast in the Assembly elections four months ago: Of the 11.53 crore voters in four States, only 15 lakh or 1.13 per cent opted for it. The percentage in the Capital was barely half of that. In the constituency where Arvind Kejriwal won by a margin of 22,000 votes, NOTA accounted for a mere 435!

Currently, there are 12 countries that use NOTA — all in a form that allows the highest vote-getter, irrespective of scratch votes, to assume office. How is that empowerment? Is it even a true yardstick of apathy? There is a reason why Russia introduced (1991) and abolished (2006) NOTA, only to now consider reinstating it under a dictatorial leader hoping to be seen as pro-democracy. Perhaps, in our country, where hypocrisy and diplomacy are so inextricably entwined, a spineless NOTA is all we deserve.

Assistant Editor

COMMENT NOW