Syllabus
GS Paper 2 – Salient features of the Representation of People’s Act.
Context
Janata Dal (United) candidate Devesh Chandra Thakur faced criticism for suggesting he wouldn’t assist Muslim and Yadav communities because they didn’t support him in the elections.Highlighting importance of voter secrecy
Source
The Hindu| Editorial dated 2nd July 2024
A tool to ensure complete voter anonymity
The recent controversy surrounding Devesh Chandra Thakur, the Janata Dal (United) candidate from the Sitamarhi Lok Sabha seat, brings to light issues related to the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and democratic principles. Thakur’s statement against certain communities has rekindled interest in the longstanding debate about voter secrecy and the use of totalisers in elections. This article explores the implications of Thakur’s remarks, the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) proposal for totalisers, and the varied responses from political parties.
Voter Secrecy
It ensures that how an individual votes in an election remains confidential. It prevents anyone from knowing for whom or what a voter has cast their ballot.
Significance of Voter Secrecy
- Protection from Retribution:
- Fear of Reprisal: Without voter secrecy, individuals may fear retribution or discrimination based on their voting choices.
- Safe Voting Environment: Secrecy ensures voters can make choices without fearing negative consequences from political parties, employers, or peers.
- Prevention of Coercion:
- Freedom of Choice: Secrecy prevents coercion by ensuring that no one can force voters to reveal their votes.
- Autonomy in Voting: Voters can exercise their right freely, reflecting their true preferences without external pressure.
- Encouragement of Participation:
- Increased Voter Turnout: When voters feel safe and assured of confidentiality, they are more likely to participate in the electoral process.
- Trust in Electoral System: Secrecy builds trust in the electoral system, making citizens more willing to engage in voting.
- Maintenance of Electoral Integrity:
- Prevention of Manipulation: Ensures that elections are fair and free from manipulation by parties who might try to influence voters through knowledge of their voting patterns.
- Support for Genuine Democracy:
- True Representation: Ensures that elected representatives genuinely reflect the will of the people, free from distortions caused by fear or coercion.
- Accountability: Representatives are held accountable to the entire electorate, not just those whose votes can be identified.
Mechanisms in India to Protect Voter Secrecy
- Private Voting Booths: Each voter is provided a private booth to mark their ballot without being seen by others.
- EVM Use: Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) are designed to record votes without linking them to voters’ identities.
- Legal Framework
- Conduct of Election Rules, 1961: Rule 56 mandates the rejection of ballot papers that bear any identifying marks.
- Representation of the People Act, 1951 : Ensures that elections are conducted in a free and fair manner, protecting the secrecy of votes.
- Constitutional Protections: Article 324 grants the Election Commission of India (ECI) the authority to ensure free and fair elections, including maintaining voter secrecy.
- Election Commission of India (ECI) Initiatives
- Strict Enforcement: The ECI enforces strict rules and guidelines to ensure voter secrecy during elections.
- Voter Awareness Campaigns: Educating voters about their rights and the importance of a secret ballot through various campaigns and outreach programs.
- Polling Station Protocols
- Voter Identity Verification: Voters’ identities are verified before entering the voting area, ensuring that only eligible voters can vote.
- No Photography: Photography is strictly prohibited inside polling stations to prevent any recording of how individuals vote.
- Counting Procedures
- Secured Counting Centers: Counting is done in secured centers with strict access control to prevent tampering or unauthorized observation.
- Monitoring and Complaints Redressal
- Election Observers: Appointed by the ECI to monitor the conduct of elections and ensure adherence to secrecy norms.
- Grievance Mechanism: Voters can report any breaches of secrecy or other electoral malpractices to the ECI for redressal.
Totaliser Proposal
The totaliser is proposed to mask booth-level voting patterns, preventing the identification of voting behaviour in specific areas. Its aim is to protect voters from post-election harassment and ensure their votes remain confidential.
- Timeline:
- 2007: The concept of the totaliser was introduced as a solution to protect voter privacy.
- 2008: A demonstration of the totaliser was conducted, and political parties did not object to its use.
- 2009: The totaliser was trialed in bye-elections in Meghalaya and Uttar Pradesh.
- 2011: The Madras High Court ordered the government to consider the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) recommendation to amend rules for the totaliser.
- 2013: The ECI reiterated its request to amend the 1961 Rules to incorporate the totaliser.
- 2014: A Supreme Court case (W.P. 422/2014) highlighted the need for the totaliser to protect voter privacy.
- Political Parties’ Views
- Support: Bahujan Samaj Party, Congress, and Nationalist Congress Party supported the use of the totaliser.
- Conditional Support: The Communist Party of India (Marxist) advised a phased introduction of the totaliser.
- Opposition: The Bharatiya Janata Party opposed the use of the totaliser.
- Government Stance
- Initial Indifference: The government showed reluctance to address the issue until 2014, not taking a definitive stance.
- Opposition: In 2016, the government stated that the totaliser did not serve any larger public interest.
- Group of Ministers: Concluded that revealing booth-wise voting patterns could increase development activities, opposing the totaliser’s purpose.
- Legal and Judicial Proceedings
- 2014 Supreme Court Case: The Election Commission reaffirmed its commitment to the totaliser and sought an amendment to the Rules to enable its use.
- 2017 Supreme Court Case (W.P (C) No. 927/2017): Another case was filed to mandate the use of the totaliser.
- The matter has remained dormant since March 2018, with no significant progress.
Conclusion
While the ECI remains firm on the necessity of totalisers to protect voter interests, political parties and the government are divided on the matter. The ongoing legal battles and government deliberations indicate that this issue will continue to be a point of contention in the pursuit of fair and transparent elections in India.
References
Related PYQ
Discuss the role of the Election Commission of India in the light of the evolution of the Model Code of Conduct. [ UPSC Civil Services Exam – Mains 2022]
Practice Question
How does the Election Commission of India’s proposal to use totalisers aim to protect voter secrecy and prevent political retribution? [150 words]