Vote for positive change

Vote for positive change

Jagdeep S Chhokar

GovernanceNow, May 16-31, 2011, p.31

The interim success of the movement for Jan Lokpal Bill, led by Anna Hazare, and the almost raging debate on corruption, have once again brought focus on the issue of wide-ranging reforms. Before going on to discuss some of what has been called a slew or a basket of reforms, it is important to underline that the current events seem to have brought the Indian society and

polity at a critical juncture where far-reaching changes in the way we govern ourselves seem to be a possibility within reach. It is possibly the first time in independent India that the political establishment seems to feel a threat to its hegemony.

While the necessity, criticality and contribution of the political establishment in a representative democracy is a given and must be recognized and respected, its blatant functioning for its own benefit, seemingly at the cost of the nation and its people, is not healthy and points to the need for course correction. The Jan Lokpal Bill is one such correction whose time seems to have come after a 42-year wait and this opportunity of moving the balance of power in favour of the so-called non-ruling class must not be lost.

Among the other reforms that have been mentioned, not only by the media in general but also by some of those intimately involved with the Jan Lokpal Bill, are electoral reforms. It has been

said that while the Lokpal Bill is an attempt to catch and punish those who engage in corruption, electoral reforms may be able to prevent those susceptible or prone to corruption from getting into positions where they can indulge in it. But what do electoral reforms entail? Is it only getting a button on the EVM that says “None of the above”, and/or getting the “Right to recall”?

Elections are usually thought of as a periodic affairs, originally on a five-year cycle, when “We, the people” choose who will govern us for the next five years. As a TV spot featuring Aamir Khan says, we often spend more time choosing which vegetables to buy than in deciding whom to vote for. Whether that is realistic or not, it seems to be true that most of us don’t spend much time thinking about what goes on behind our casting of our vote. While the election commission of

India is the best source of this information, here is what possibly is an incomplete listing of what the electoral process includes.

It starts with the basic issue of “Who can vote?” While the parliament decides what the voting age should be, the responsibility of registering voters rests with the Election Commission (EC). The next basic issue is: “Who can contest?” Once again, the law is made by the parliament

but its implementation rests with the EC whose officials (whether permanent or on deputation) accept or reject nomination papers. In between these two, there is a plethora of actions that have to be taken. How will the winner be decided? We follow the “first-past-the-post” system that we

borrowed from the British, who themselves recently held a referendum about its continuation. Is the current system appropriate for us or should we change? If we do want to change, which of the 272 systems that the Law Commission of India tells us exist in the world, should we choose?

Which political parties are to be recognised and are eligible to put up candidates on their behalf? How much money can a candidate spend on the election campaign? How can, and should, the expenditure be monitored? How many polling booths should there be and where should they be located? How many and who should be the polling agents, and election observers?

While the constitution lays down the life of the legislatures, it also provides for a window of time during which the elections must be held. Decisions about exactly when to hold elections also have

to be made. Of course, Article 324 (1) of the constitution vests “the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections to parliament and to the legislature of every state and of elections to the offices of president and vice-president held under this constitution” with the election commission.

While this is what is called “plenary” power, which the dictionary describes, as “full; complete; entire; absolute; unqualified”, it still has to be exercised within the limits laid down in the constitution and as interpreted by the supreme court.

It is in this background that we are embarking on a series on electoral reforms. Each of the next few issues will carry a fairly in-depth piece on an important aspect of electoral reforms. This week, we look at the rising expenditure on holding elections and the ways to curb this escalating

cost.

Chhokar, a former dean of IIM, Ahmedabad, is a founder of Association for Democratic

Reforms and National Election Watch.