POLITICAL DIARY
New Delhi, 2 May 2009
System Against
Ballot
PAPPU DID NOT VOTE
AFTER ALL
By Poonam I Kaushish
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)
|