THE CONTEXT: The recent controversial remarks by JD(U) MP Devesh Chandra Thakur have reignited the debate on voter privacy and electoral integrity in India. Thakur’s statement about not helping specific communities who didn’t vote for him highlights the risks of booth-wise voting data being available. This incident brings renewed attention to the long-pending proposal to introduce totalizer machines for vote counting to protect voter secrecy.
THE ISSUES:
- Breach of Democratic Principles: Devesh Chandra Thakur’s statement, which suggested that he would not help members of the Muslim and Yadav communities because they did not vote for him, directly contradicts the democratic principle that elected representatives should serve all constituents impartially, regardless of their voting behavior. This assertion of a transactional relationship undermines the constitutional spirit of equal representation and service to all citizens.
- Violation of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC): Thakur’s remarks were seen as a breach of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), which aims to ensure free and fair elections by preventing actions that could intimidate or discriminate against voters. Although the MCC was no longer in force at the time of his statement, its principles remain relevant to maintaining the integrity of the electoral process.
- Rekindling Interest in Dormant Writ Petitions: Thakur’s controversial statement has rekindled interest in dormant writ petitions related to electoral reforms, particularly those aimed at enhancing voter anonymity and preventing post-election retribution. These petitions highlight ongoing concerns about the need for legal and procedural changes to protect voter privacy and avoid intimidation.
- Proposal for Totaliser in Vote Counting: The Election Commission of India’s (ECI) proposal to introduce a totalizer for counting votes is a significant issue. The totalizer would mask booth-level voting patterns by aggregating votes from multiple polling stations, thereby enhancing voter anonymity and reducing the risk of post-election harassment. This proposal has seen varying support and opposition from political parties and government bodies.
- Political and Legal Responses: The political and legal responses to Thakur’s statement have varied. While some political leaders and parties condemned his remarks and called for his retraction, others supported him, citing similar experiences of voter behavior. Legal actions, including court cases, have been initiated against Thakur for his statements, reflecting the contentious nature of the issue and its potential legal ramifications.
- Broader Implications for Electoral Reforms: The controversy underscores the broader need for electoral reforms in India, particularly those aimed at protecting voter privacy and ensuring that elected representatives serve all constituents fairly. The debate over totalizers and other measures to enhance voter anonymity highlights the ongoing challenges in balancing transparency, accountability, and voter protection in the electoral process.
THE WAY FORWARD:
- Strengthen enforcement of Model Code of Conduct: The Election Commission of India (ECI) could consider extending specific critical provisions of the MCC beyond the election period to ensure elected representatives uphold democratic values after office. This could be done through an amendment to the Representation of the People Act of 1951. Former Chief Election Commissioner S.Y. Quraishi has advocated for giving statutory backing to the Model Code of Conduct to make it more enforceable.
- Implement the totalizer for vote counting: The ECI’s proposal to use a totalizer for counting votes from multiple EVMs together would help protect voter privacy and reduce the risk of post-election intimidation based on voting patterns. This aligns with the constitutional right to ballot secrecy under Article 21. In People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (2013), the Supreme Court held that the right to vote freely is part of freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a), and secrecy of the ballot is integral to free and fair elections.
- Amend Conduct of Election Rules: The government should consider amending Rule 66A of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, to empower the ECI to use totalizers that were deemed necessary, similar to the existing Rule 59A for mixing ballot papers.
- Sensitization programs for elected representatives: Conduct mandatory sensitization programs for newly elected representatives on their constitutional duties and the principles of inclusive governance. This could be made a prerequisite for taking the oath of office.
- Grievance redressal mechanism: Establish a dedicated grievance redressal mechanism where citizens can report discriminatory behavior by elected representatives. This could be overseen by the ECI or an independent ethics committee.
- Legal action for discriminatory statements: Consider amending the Representation of the People Act, 1951, to include provisions for acting against elected representatives who make openly discriminatory statements against any community. This could consist of disqualification in extreme cases. Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of laws to all persons.
THE CONCLUSION:
The totalizer issue remains unresolved between the Election Commission’s advocacy and the government’s reluctance. While some parties support its introduction to enhance voter privacy, others oppose it, citing potential drawbacks. As India grapples with balancing electoral transparency and voter protection, the totalizer debate exemplifies the ongoing challenges in strengthening the country’s democratic processes.
UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTIONS:
Q.1 Discuss the role of the Election Commission of India, considering the evolution of the Model Code of Conduct. 2022
Q.2 Discuss the procedures to decide the disputes arising from the election of a Member of the Parliament or State Legislature under The Representation of the People Act, 1951. What grounds on which any returned candidate’s election may be declared void? What remedy is available to the aggrieved party against the decision? Refer to the case laws. 2022
Q.3 “There is a need to simplify the procedure for disqualifying persons found guilty of corrupt practices under the Representation of Peoples Act.” Comment. 2020
MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:
Q.1 Examine the issues surrounding the introduction of a totalizer for vote counting in Indian elections. Discuss the arguments for and against its implementation and evaluate its potential impact on electoral integrity and voter behavior.
SOURCE:
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a-tool-to-ensure-complete-voter-anonymity/article68356097.ece
Spread the Word