The 2014 Indian general election is being touted as momentous for many reasons, one of them being the introduction of NOTA or 'None of The Above Option' to voters. However, when NOTA has no affect on poll outcome, is it just a confidence trickIJ The Pioneer's examination of provisions relating to NOTA and popular reaction to them indicated that 'None of The Above' option in India seems to have been defeated already.
For, as stated by the Election Commission of India, 'Even if the number of electors opting for NOTA option is more than the number of votes polled by any of the candidates, the candidate who secures the largest number of votes has to be declared elected." The note further states, "Under the provisions of Section 53(2) of RP Act, 51, if the number of contesting candidates is equal to the number of seats to be filled, the Returning Officer has to declare all the contesting candidates to be duly elected. In the case of elections to the lok Sabha and legislative Assemblies, in cases where there is only one contesting candidate in the fray, the Returning Officer has to, in accordance with the provisions of the said Section 53(2), declare the sole contesting candidate as elected. The provision of NOTA option which is an expression of decision not to vote for the contesting candidates is not relevant in such cases." The Pioneer found that popular sentiment is that EC should not declare results when the majority uses the NOTA option. Since NOTA is based on the principle of one negative vote for all candidates, if the total number of NOTA option votes is more than the number of votes polled for any of the candidates, why should the candidate who secures the largest number of votes be declared elected, question many voters. The Pioneer's ground survey revealed that in Uttarakhand not only electors, but even contesting lok Sabha candidates oppose NOTA as it has been introduced currently in India. According to former Chief Minister and BJP's lok Sabha candidate from Haridwar, Ramesh Pokhriyal Nishank, "Without the provision for re-election if NOTA gets maximum votes, 'none of the above' option has no use. When the largest number of electors rejects all the contesting candidates, why should anyone of them be electedIJ This does not appeal to reason or logic." He also added that NOTA should be removed and positive voting should be made compulsory.
Aam Admi Party's candidate from Tehri Garhwal, Anoop Nautiyal told The Pioneer, "I am not satisfied with NOTA in its current form. If 'none of the above' wins majority votes, the incumbent should hold office until a by-election is held. There is definitely scope for improvement in the implementation of NOTA. Without provision for a new election, the very purpose of giving voters the right to reject all candidates is completely defeated."
To the argument against the implementation of the same based on the cost of holding new elections, "follow-up by-elections are far less costly than electing undeserving and unacceptable candidates to the legislature,' echoed most people in dialogues with The Pioneer. As emphasized by advocate Atul Singh Pundir, "In its landmark judgment on September 27, 2013 even the Supreme Court while directing the Election Commission to implement the NOTA option at once or in a phased manner with assistance from the Central Government had emphasised that there was dire need of negative voting in the electoral system to ensure that a candidate wins only on the basis of 'positive votes'. Any change is always accompanied by teething problems and discomfort. However, progress is impossible without change. The financial implications of conducting by-elections is only an initiatory concern that is far outweighed by the need to reform governance in India by improving the quality of political candidates being fielded to represent its people.
There will be the nascent hiccups but subsequently electors will emerge as more aware and empowered while political parties will be compelled to improve their performance."But NOTA without provision for by-election or a new follow up election is nothing but a propagandist reform hoax with no positive impact, said the lawyer reflecting the reaction of many others who batted for an amendment to give NOTA teeth.
Similarly, former MlA Karen Mayer remarked, "Compared to the expenditure incurred by parties on propaganda, any money spent on by-elections to eliminate unworthy candidates is well spent on a good cause.Given the incessant cross-party mud-slinging dominating current day Indian polity, the right to reject every candidate may reduce negative campaigning by encouraging candidates to campaign for their own candidacy instead of just maligning their opponents. However, this objective is beaten if there is no by-election."