Sinjini De, EOI, 14 June 2024 : n democratic politics, success is often measured by the fairness and integrity of the electoral process. When individuals vote, they express their basic political rights as citizens of the country. Just as individuals have the right to choose who forms the government, they also have the right to reject all contesting parties to express their disapproval.
This is encapsulated by the idea of NOTA or ‘None of the Above’.Although NOTA was introduced in India in September 2013, its history traces back to 2004, when the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), a non-governmental organization, approached the Supreme Court seeking measures to protect the ‘right to secrecy’ of voters. They argued that the Conduct of Elections Rules 1961 unjustly violated this right as the presiding officer from the ECI maintained a record of those who chose not to vote, along with their signatures and thumb impressions.
Fast forward nine years later, and the Supreme Court of India, in the PUCL vs. Union of India judgment of 2013, directed the Election Commission of India to include NOTA in elections to the Lok Sabha and respective state legislative assemblies as a measure to safe guard voters’ choices. Following this judgment, NOTA was used for the first time in the 2013 Assembly Elections of the five states of Mizoram, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, Delhi, and Madhya Pradesh, and later in the 2014 General Elections as well.
Present at the very bottom of the ballot as the last option, NOTA gives citizens the right to publicly and formally express their dissent against the contesting parties in an election. If a citizen goes through the list of political parties available and finds themselves unsatisfied, they can then opt for NOTA. This enables them to express their negative opinions and lack of support for the candidates while still exercising their right to vote as citizens. With the introduction of NOTA, voters now have the right to reject as well as the right to elect.
Present at the very bottom of the ballot as the last option, NOTA gives citizens the right to publicly and formally express their dissent against the contesting parties in an election. If a citizen goes through the list of political parties available and finds themselves unsatisfied, they can then opt for NOTA. This enables them to express their negative opinions and lack of support for the candidates while still exercising their right to vote as citizens. With the introduction of NOTA, voters now have the right to reject as well as the right to elect.
However, critics have questioned the effectiveness of this option now available to voters. The Supreme Court of India has even termed NOTA an ‘invalid vote’ since it does not change the electoral outcome in anyway. For example, in a constituency with 100 seats, if NOTA gets 99 votes, the seat will still be awarded to the party that won that one vote.
Therefore, it does not matter how many people opt for NOTA; the result will be in favor of the next best option. In some reserved constituencies, a high count of NOTA votes has been recorded. This shows bias and discrimination against candidates belonging to a certain caste and is a direct misuse of the purpose of NOTA.
Some consider NOTA a waste of votes since it does not change any outcome and only subtracts from the winning margin of the candidate who was going to win anyway. The results feel inconclusive and confusing since there is no clear mandate for the winning candidate. However, what NOTA does is successfully send a message to the contesting parties. It serves as feedback to the political parties and their candidates and lets them know that the public is dissatisfied with them. This then forces the concerned parties to change their ways and field better, more capable, and more ethical representatives, as they risk losing the seat if voters are dissatisfied.
Therefore, it does not matter how many people opt for NOTA; the result will be in favor of the next best option. In some reserved constituencies, a high count of NOTA votes has been recorded. This shows bias and discrimination against candidates belonging to a certain caste and is a direct misuse of the purpose of NOTA.
Some consider NOTA a waste of votes since it does not change any outcome and only subtracts from the winning margin of the candidate who was going to win anyway. The results feel inconclusive and confusing since there is no clear mandate for the winning candidate. However, what NOTA does is successfully send a message to the contesting parties. It serves as feedback to the political parties and their candidates and lets them know that the public is dissatisfied with them. This then forces the concerned parties to change their ways and field better, more capable, and more ethical representatives, as they risk losing the seat if voters are dissatisfied.
While the number of NOTA voters has marginally dipped this year since its introduction in 2014, the continual presence of NOTA votes in the electoral race paints a rather distressing and alarming picture of Indian democracy. In about a third of the Lok Sabha seats in Karnataka, NOTA emerged as the third-most preferred option after the BJP and Congress. Indorere wrote electoral history by recording an all-time high of 2,18,674 NOTA votes. Similarly, North Eastern states recorded a higher number of NOTA votes than before, with Assam scoring the highest average of1.19% across 14 seats .
A high record of NOTA votes indicates that something is wrong and needs to be changed. NOTA need not restrict itself to a totally symbolic stance. In fact, the Supreme Court is considering a petition for nullifying elections and holding fresh polls in cases where NOTA secures a majority. Barring candidates who secure fewer votes than NOTA and having them bear the cost of re-election helps to mitigate the financial loss on the Centre and allows the voters to select from a fresher and better batch of candidates. However, while NOTA does provide an opportunity for the voter to voice their dissent, it also emphasizes the importance of political awareness so that NOTA is used for its intended purpose and not to undermine the representative structure of our democracy.
(The views of the author are personal)