India Electoral Reforms - Right to Recall/Reject

[Pranay]

As India girds for Phase II of Anna Hazare's drive to clean up India after his success with the Jan Lokpal Bill in fighting corruption; Anna's next course of action are to institute some fundamental changes in how India practices its' democracy - which has been a source of immense corruption.

The issue at hand being Right to Recall/Reject candidates who have already been elected by the people in elections and for various reasons have not lived up to the electoral's mandate for good governance, moral turpitude, etc.


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 784009.cms

Congress on Monday said the right to recall elected representatives and reject candidates as demanded by activist Anna Hazare is "not practical" as "50 percent of people do not vote" in the country while the BJP said the issue should be given serious consideration.

"Right to recall is not practical in India. 50 percent people do not go for voting. Candidates win elections by getting only three crore votes out of 13-14 crore voters.... so I do not think it is possible in the country," Congress spokesperson Rashid Alvi told reporters outside Parliament House.

On the demand for right to reject candidates, he said, "Same way this will be applicable when maximum voters will come forward for voting. First we should try to ensure that 80-90 percent voters go for voting. Otherwise right to reject is also not feasible."

Soon after he ended his 12-day fast on Lokpal issue, Anna Hazare on Sunday said his fight would now be for Right to Recall and Right to Reject as part of electoral reforms so that corruption can be reduced.

"While Right to Recall would be for those elected, the Right to Reject will be a column in the ballot paper which would ensure the voter has a right to say that he does not like the listed candidates.

"We have to reform electoral system. (we need) Right to Reject. You should be able to reject your candidate in the ballot paper. We have to do that."

Backing poll reforms, BJP leader Rajnath Singh said, "As far as change in sytem is concerned, we are in favour of it. There should be changes in electoral system, administrative system and economic system."

Recalling the JP movement, Singh said, "When JP had given the call for complete revolution in the country, the issue of right to recall and right to reject was raised during that time. The issue should be taken up seriously."

The Congress Party and the current UPAII government under the Prime Minister Honorable Dr. Man Mohan Singh - even after having been lacerated in the Parliament on the Jan Lokpal Bill issue and humbled by the people of India - has drawn battle lines on this issue as in the article above.

I have had a first hand experience with the concept of Right to Recall a few years ago in my constituency here in the States whereby a serving politician with deep connections to Land Developers was thrown out of office by an alert and aware electorate after that politician illegally tried to use "Eminent Domain" to evict people from a part of town where the Developer wanted to bring in a Mall.

Admins: I'm aware that we have had a thread on this issue by a controversial past member on BR. Would like to start an Issue based thread on this subject as the public focus in India is reaching a higher pitch. Place the thread in whichever Discussion Forum appropriate.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/electoral-re ... 373-3.html

Hazare said that his fight would now be for Right to recall and Right to reject as part of electoral reforms so that corruption can be reduced.

"While Right to recall would be for those elected, the Right to reject will be a column in the ballot paper which would ensure the voter has a right to say that he does not like the listed candidates.
"We have to reform electoral system. (we need) Right to reject. You should be able to reject your candidate in the ballot paper. We have to do that."

"If the majority in a constituency says that they reject a candidate, even then the election should be cancelled. How much money they (candidates) will distribute? Once the candidate spends Rs 10 crore for one election and if the election is cancelled, then right sense will dawn upon them," he said.

Maintaining that people's parliament is bigger than "Parliament in Delhi", Hazare said that is why Parliament had to listen to people's parliament.

[Yagnasri]

I write as a person who has worked many years for BJP and also as a person who has taken part (not as a candidate) in many elections, recall system is most unsuitable for India of today. It is very easy for us to sit in the a/c rooms to say these things and Anna to hope for.

[Pranay]

I write as a person who has worked many years for BJP and also as a person who has taken part (not as a candidate) in many elections, recall system is most unsuitable for India of today. It is very easy for us to sit in the a/c rooms to say these things and Anna to hope for.

Could you give specific reasons for claiming that such a feature in India's Election Laws would be "most unsuitable" for India?? And by the way, what does it have to do with a/c rooms, etc...

[Tanaji]

Can mods unban Rahul Mehta by any chance?

[vina]

Yawn.. Before trying to become the Republic of Californication with all this recall and referendum business, let us get the basics in place. Let us get power devolved down to local govts! None of the cities have any power and the mayor if any is a toothless rubber stamp. Yes, the Police force needs reforms, the cities should have the power to hire and appoint their police forces, the school system needs to be decentralized to local govts. Here , the problem is that the country is too centralized. The leeches in Dilli do their share of blood sucking and spend on Netas , Babus and Air Indias, while equally importantly,the state capitals are equally big blood suckers and a massive centralized bureaucracy on key daily life issues on health, education , transport, public health, etc..

For eg, there is no way in hell that the Chief Minister of TN and KA will take their hands off Chennai and Bengaluru and let them have true fiscal and management independence . Cant happen. The potential lucre from these places is orders of magnitude more than the rest of TN and KA. You need devolution where it really needed. Letting some dead beat half starving villages and Panchayats become "empowered" is a cop out.

[Yagnasri]

Pranayji - I am planing to write a detailed opinion this week or next week and post it either here or on my blog rlindia@blogspot.com. In the meanwhile read about the Wiskanson state in US had some recall elections resently. Please read about that.

[Pranay]

Pranayji - I am planing to write a detailed opinion this week or next week and post it either here or on my blog rlindia@blogspot.com. In the meanwhile read about the Wiskanson state in US had some recall elections resently. Please read about that.

Looking forward to your detailed opinion, but, i can do without the Ji, thanks.

The following may come in handy in your writeup,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recall_election

Along with the initiative, the referendum, and the direct primary, the recall election was one of the major electoral reforms advocated by leaders of the Progressive movement in the United States during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, although it was initially proposed in William S. U'Ren's Oregon newspaper. Recall elections do not take place at the federal level. The majority of states allow recall elections in local jurisdictions, but only eighteen states permit recall elections to remove state officials and a nineteenth state, Illinois, allows it for Governors only.[5] The modern day father of the recall is considered to be Dr. John Randolph Haynes, who formed the Direct Legislation League of California in 1900. Los Angeles became the first major city to adopt the recall in 1903. [2]

Only two governors have ever been successfully recalled. In 1921, Lynn Frazier, Governor of North Dakota, was recalled during a dispute about state-owned industries, and in 2003, Governor Gray Davis of California was recalled over the state budget. Additionally, a recall was approved against Arizona Governor Evan Mecham, but he was impeached and convicted before it got on the ballot.

In Alaska, Georgia, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Rhode Island, and Washington, specific grounds are required for a recall. Some form of malfeasance or misconduct while in office must be identified by the petitioners. The target may choose to dispute the validity of the grounds in court, and a court then judges whether the allegations in the petition rise to a level where a recall is necessary. In the November 2010 general election, Illinois passed a referendum to amend the state constitution to allow a recall in light of ex-Governor Rod Blagojevich's corruption scandal. In the other eleven states that permit state-wide recall, no grounds are required and recall petitions may be circulated for any reason. However, the target is permitted to submit responses to the stated reasons for recall.
The minimum number of signatures and the time limit to qualify a recall vary between states. In addition, the handling of recalls once they qualify differs. In some states, a recall triggers a simultaneous special election, where the vote on the recall, as well as the vote on the replacement if the recall succeeds, are on the same ballot. In the 2003 California recall election, over 100 candidates appeared on the replacement portion of the ballot. In other states, a separate special election is held after the target is recalled, or a replacement is appointed by the Governor or some other state authority.

has a lot of detail on the subject matter, though, not everything. Do note the successful recalls and also the unsuccessful ones.

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 936581.cms

RALEGAN SIDDHI: Meeting for the first time here, Anna Hazare and his core group on Saturday decided that he will write to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on electoral reforms and performance audit of MPs, including the right to recall of elected representatives and right to reject.

Hazare, who is leading a campaign for a strong Lokpal Bill to check corruption, will write to the Prime Minister seeking his views on these issues as also the land acquisition bill.

Top members of the core group, including Arvind Kejriwal, Prashant Bhushan, Santosh Hegde, Kiran Bedi and Medha Patkar, attended the meeting held for the first time in the village where Hazare has done a lot of work.

"On behalf of the movement, Anna Hazare will be writing to the Prime Minister seeking his views on the annual performance audit of MPs, right to reject, right to recall and land acquisition bill," Kejriwal told a press conference at the end of the proceedings on the first day of the two-day meeting.

Kejriwal said Hazare will seek Singh's views on performance audit of MPs and on that basis whether there is a need for right to reject or right to recall. He said for right to reject, there was no need for any change in law.

On the issue of right to reject and recall, he said, Team Anna members will meet chief election commissioner SY Quraishi soon.

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 939692.cms

Anna Hazare isn't taking his eyes off Parliament yet and his next campaign, announced on Saturday, will demand annual performance audits of MPs, right to recall elected representatives, right to reject candidates contesting elections and mandatory approval of gram sabha before acquiring any land.

"Hazare will send the letter shortly and seek Prime Minister's views on these three vital issues", said Team Anna member Arvind Kejriwal, who briefed the media after the first session of a two-day meeting of the core team. The meeting was attended by Hazare, Kejriwal, Kiran Bedi, Santosh Hegde, Shanti Bhushan, Prashant Bhushan, Manish Sisodia and Medha Patkar.

Kejriwal said Anna wanted an audit of MPs to fix responsibility. "On December 23, 2008 the parliament passed 17 bills and in the period between 2004 to 2009 only 89 MPs spoke in the house which raised questions about their functioning. The MPs are elected to run the country hence their annual performance audit is essential," he said.

He said Anna will also seek the PM's views on the demand for the right to recall and right to reject if any of the candidates contesting election did not meet people's expectations. "There should be an option 'none of the above' in the electronic voting machine and if this option gets the maximum votes then re-election should be ordered. Team Anna will also meet the chief election commissioner to demand that `the none of the above' option be given during the forthcoming civic elections. We feel that it can be done," Kejriwal stated.

Ideally the MP audits should be undertaken by outside "objective" organizations and be easily accessible by the general public. The conduct, input, etc of the MP's in Parliament, in addition to their activities in their constituency should become a crucial criteria when these individuals seek reelection.

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 319451.cms

Reaching out to activist Anna Hazare even as he campaigns against the Congress, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said the government was considering the " right to reject" provision among other electoral reforms. However, he added that political consensus was required for this.

"Our government is actively considering various proposals related to electoral reforms. Among the proposals being considered is the 'right to reject' which you have mentioned. In a democratic society, political consensus is necessary on some issues. We want to discuss several proposals on electoral reforms with all political parties and act on proposals on which there is broad agreement," Singh said in a letter written on October 10.

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 375617.cms

Amid a campaign by Team Anna for polls reforms, the Election Commission has disfavoured any proposal to include the 'right to reject' or 'right to recall' clauses in election rules, saying they may not work in a large country like India.

Opposing the proposal to have a 'right to recall' as in many developed countries, chief election commission (CEC) S Y Quraishi has held that it will "destabilise" the country, especially in areas where "people already feel alienated".

On the proposal of introducing a clause on Right to Reject, Quraishi said even though the EC has supported introduction of 49-O (rule) button in EVMs for voters to express their displeasure over candidates, the proposal will lead to more frequent elections.

49-O rule of The Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 describes the procedure to be followed when a valid voter decides not to cast his vote, and decides to record this fact.

"Our main fear is that if we start rejecting all the candidates, we will have another election and people already complain of election fatigue," Quraishi told Karan Thapar in Devil's advocate programme to be aired on CNN-IBN later today evening.

The CEC, is however, open to discussion with activist Anna Hazare who has suggested that if all candidates spending crores in elections are rejected by the voters, it will discourage them from overspending and would control election expenditure.

"We have an open mind on this. If a proposal leads to that larger good, then we must consider it. I would like to discuss this interesting point and see what are its implications," said Quraishi, disclosing that he has scheduled a meeting with Hazare later this month on the issue.

[Pranay]

http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=738492

A day after the Election Commission disfavoured the idea of right to recall, Law Minister Salman Khurshid today said government is working on Team Anna's proposal for such a provision which could form part of the all-party consultations on electoral reforms.

He said the demand for right to recall of elected lawmakers was a difficult task, but the government was "working on that".

"We have a very strong lobby that is questioning us on the need to introduce the right to reject," he said speaking on 'Bharat and India: Challenges and Ambitions' at the Asian Forum for Global Governance here.

Khurshid said there are also "strong demands" for right to recall inspired largely by some small segments in US and Europe, particularly in municipal elections.

"Right to recall in a constituency that has more than 1.5 million voters. Get signatures from 100 thousand or 50 thousand, authenticate those signatures is not an easy job. But we are working on that," he said.

The minister later elaborated that the Law Ministry has prepared a note on the subject.

"We have given papers on it. I have discussed it with the Election Commissioner as well. He has talked to the media and he has expressed some of his reservations. But we will be happy to put it to the all-party consultations that will take place."

[Pranay]

As reported on Times Now ticker - Bihar CM Nitish Kumar supports Right to Recall...

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 392450.cms

Congress and BJP on Monday did not appear enthusiastic about Annaz Hazare's suggestion for the right to recall of elected candidates.

The two major national parties remained non-commital on the issue even as Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar supporting Team Anna's demand.

After Chief Election Commissioner S Y Quraishi yesterday held the right to recall will "destabilise" the country, especially in areas where "people already feel alienated", Kumar today called for exploring constitutional amendments for the purpose.

Asked about its ally JD-U supporting the right to recall, BJP spokesperson Shahnawaz Hussain said here that the issue is "not under discussion" in the party and it will come up with a strucutured response when the time comes.

Congress spokesperson Renuka Chowdhary said: "Let us leave it to the experts... If there is anything else to be reversed, it will collectively be examined in assemblies and parliament by the people who participate but no random opinion can be given casually somewhere else".

Asked what was Congress' stand on the issue, she shot back "why should we have a stand on hypothetical issues? As of now, there is no such right to recall."

Reacting to Nitish Kumar's remarks, Chowdhary said "we have to draw a line somewhere. We have good chief ministers in different states but it does not mean that they are the authorities on CEC.

[Pranay]

http://www.ndtv.com/video/live/channel/ndtv24x7

Right to Recall/Reject discussion coming up live...

[Pranay]

http://www.ndtv.com/video/live/channel/ndtv24x7

Right to Reject/Recall - Live on We the People (Kiran Bedi, etc)

Specific link to the program - http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/we-the ... eststories

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 616894.cms

Differing with Team Anna, BJP leader L K Advani today disfavoured the introduction of the right to recall saying it may destabilise the whole structure in a country as big as India.

"I am inclined to agree with the Chief Election Commissioner that in a country as vast as ours, it (right to recall) may have consequences which may destabilise the whole structure," he told reporters here today.

Chief Election Commissioner S Y Quraishi had recently said that the right to recall could destabilise the country. Advani also said nowhere in the world had such a measure been enforced.

"Therefore, it is not surprising that nowhere in the world except in one small country somewhere, has the right to recall been accepted," he said. {Factually incorrect - Right to Recall is present and active in this small country called USA. Mr. Advani needs to do a fact check before passing judgments. As i have mentioned above, my electoral constituency has had a Recall Election in which legislator was thrown out.} {I would have hoped for the newspaper to have done a fact check themselves and set the matter straight}

Team Anna has been vigorously campaigning in favour of right to recall which has not found favour with the Election Commission of India as well.

Advani, however, favoured electoral reforms in the country especially measures that could help stop use of blackmoney in elections and criminalisation of politics.

He said the BJP had been in the forefront in seeking electoral reforms and said his party colleague Atal Bihari Vajpayee had raised the issue of electoral reforms way back in 1970 and forced Parliament to set up a Joint Committee on the issue.

Advani said, "We are keen to see whatever is needs to be done about electoral reforms is expedited. There is no doubt that electoral reforms, if effectively implemented, can deal with the role of money power in elections which is bound to curb corruption."

Alleging extensive use of black money in elections in the country the BJP leader said, "I also believe that the issue of black money and elections are interlinked. If you want to deal with corruption in the country, the issue of electoral reforms must be addressed," he said.

[Sachin]

I remember reading a report. One of the Election Commissioners (or a retired EC) stated that right to recall would not be applicable in India. Because as soon as one candidate is elected as the winner, his nearest opponents would immediately start planning for some how getting the elected fellow "recalled". And this would go in infinite cycles. The gent also opined that elections in India require massive resources to be pulled in, so having an election pretty much every day would be chaos.

[Virupaksha]

{Factually incorrect - Right to Recall is present and active in this small country called USA. Mr. Advani needs to do a fact check before passing judgments. As i have mentioned above, my electoral constituency has had a Recall Election in which legislator was thrown out.} {I would have hoped for the newspaper to have done a fact check themselves and set the matter straight}

not at the central level and that too in some states.

[Pratyush]

Right to recall has been used in India as well at the panchyat level as well.

[Sachin]

Right to recall has been used in India as well at the panchyat level as well.

Can you elaborate on this? Which Panchayath had this rule implemented?

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 805660.cms

It seems that Mr. Advani of BJP and Mr. Mukherjee of the Congress share notes on what brings "political instability in the country".

Anna Hazare's demand for right to recall elected representatives and reject candidates is not feasible in a huge country like India, Union finance minister Pranab Mukherjee today said and claimed that the provision, if implemented, would only create political instability.

Without taking Hazare's name, Mukherjee said, "India is the largest functional democracy in the world with over 122 crore population and each Lok Sabha MP has an average electorate of 15 lakh. Under such circumstances, I do not know if such a demand is feasible."

"If implemented, it will create political instability in the country," he observed.

[chaanakya]

Right to recall has been used in India as well at the panchyat level as well.

Can you elaborate on this? Which Panchayath had this rule implemented?

Sachin it seems your question is unanswered. So I am taking liberty to reply.

All Panchayati Raj Acts of respective states include the provision of "Right to Recall" for office bearers. I am quoting from Jharkhand Act.

Section 28
Recall of Office - bearer of Gram Panchayat -
1. The Mukhia of a Gram Panchayat may be recalled, by a secret voting, by a majority of votes of more than half the total number of members constituting the Gram Sabha within the Gram Panchayat, in the manner prescribed; and the Mukhia shall be deemed to have vacated his office forthwith;

Provided that any such procedure for recalling shall be initiated only when not less than one-third of the total members of the Gram Sabha has presented a written representation before the District Magistrate/ Deputy Commissioner;
Provided also that any such procedure shall not be initiated until -
(a) An elected Mukhia has not completed two and a half years of his tenure;
(b) A Mukhia elected in a by-election has not completed his tenure;

2. An elected member of a Gram Panchayat shall be deemed to have vacated his office forthwith if more than half of the total number of members of the Gram Sabha constituting the said territorial constituency (Ward), for which the member has been elected, have voted in majority for his recall, by secret voting;

3. Provisions of sub-section (1) relating to recall of a member shall mutatis mutandis be applicable.

4. If any Mukhia or any member, as the case may be, wants to raise objection as to the validity of his recall (under the foregoing sub-section), he shall put up his dispute before the District Magistrate within 10 days from the date of vacation
of his office, who shall decide the same within 30 days from the date of the receipt and his decision shall be final.

[Sachin]

All Panchayati Raj Acts of respective states include the provision of "Right to Recall" for office bearers. I am quoting from Jharkhand Act.

Excellent! But has this provision been put to use at any place? Honestly, I have not seen much "recalling" happening.

[Pranay]

All Panchayati Raj Acts of respective states include the provision of "Right to Recall" for office bearers. I am quoting from Jharkhand Act.

Excellent! But has this provision been put to use at any place? Honestly, I have not seen much "recalling" happening.

Sachin - Check out the following debate @ timestamp 34:20 - Right to Recall in active use in Madhya Pradesh at the Panchayat level.

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/we-the ... eststories

[SwamyG]

http://www.sify.com/finance/in-ancient- ... q9oo.email

Aligarh: Team Anna's campaign against corruption may have caught the imagination of the nation, but what is perhaps little known is that though ancient India had a well-evolved democratic system that went down to the grassroots, its elected leaders had to adhere to well-defined laws that prescribed stiff penalties for those who swindled public money or indulged in improprieties.

Aligarh Muslim University historian S. Chandni Bi, who has specialised in epigraphy, the study of inscriptions, says around 1,000 years ago there was zero tolerance towards financial bungling. According to him, inscriptions in the southern state of Tamil Nadu clearly indicate how intolerant civil society was against corrupt practices and the violators of ethical framework.

Chandni told IANS in an interview: 'A well evolved democratic system was functional, starting at the Saba level, between the eighth and the 16th century in South India, irrespective of the ruling dynasties: the Cheras, Cholas, Pallavas, Pandyas and Vijaynagar.

'The members of a Saba were elected by the whole community of the village by a system peculiarly known as 'Kuda Olai'system (Kudam-Pot and Olai-Palm leaf). The village was divided into wards called 'Kudumbus', and every ward had to write the eligible person's names on the palm leaves. The bundle of palm leaves was emptied in a pot. The member was chosen by draw of lots.'

The most important point to note here was the issuance of strict guidelines by the rulers, inscriptions give fair indication of the clarity of thought and zero tolerance towards financial bungling.

'Among the inscriptions three are very important which belong to the 10th century A.D. Two inscriptions are found in Vaykundanatha Perumal temple at Uttramerur, Kanchipuram district and another one is from Pallipakkam village of Tanjore in Tamil Nadu state belonging to the rule of Parantaka Chola Ist,' Chandni explains.

'The crimes committed by the members of the Saba are divided into three categories. The swindling of funds or public property and those who failed to submit their accounts have been considered as crime number two. Such members were not eligible to contest the Saba election for life long. Not only they but their relatives too could not contest elections, like children, in-laws, brothers and their children, grand -parents, grand- children, relations through wife etc., nearly for three generations. They were called as 'Grama Dhurogis'.

'While murder of even Brahmins was considered pardonable, crimes like cheating or swindling public funds were unpardonable even by gods. Political crime was not pardonable but other crimes could be punished with penalties or performance of penance and charitable deeds, to become eligible for elections again.'

There were established codes of conduct laid down for the Saba members as found in an inscription from Mannur village of Tirunelveli district. Among them, the most interesting one relates to obstructing the political processes or functioning of the Saba deliberately. In such cases a penalty of five Kasu (Rupees) was imposed for every such act of mis-conduct, on such members. Yet they were permitted to stay and participate in the proceedings of the Saba. Generally, the Kings' orders were executed by passing in the Saba.

To prevent political power getting concentrated in one family leading to dynastic tendencies, rules were framed. 'According to this rule, the present members of the Saba cannot contest the election for next 2 to 10 years. In the same way none of their relatives should have contested for the past five years if one wanted to contest for membership of Saba. There is also a sub rule to provide equal opportunity for everybody stipulating induction of two new members without any previous experience as members of the Saba.'

The Sabas had to be dissolved before the election of the new one and the elections were generally conducted by the village accountant and a judge called 'Madyasthan'. In the public services there were no holidays and therefore no one in authority could neglect public duty. 'It was categorically mentioned that the elected members should provide their service for 360 days. The elected members' term of office was only one year and automatically should resign after completion of the term.'

They also actively practised the right to recall. 'In those days if an elected member of the Saba committed a crime or violated law, he was immediately sacked. Such has been our rich and exemplary past. Let us bring it back instead of looking to the west for solutions,' said Chandni who is teaching South Indian History in AMU.

[chackojoseph]

If you are confused about the election commission request to make Election bribery an cognisible offence, read para 3. I got it from the election commission itself.

Make Election bribery a cognizable offence under the IPC : EC

[Pranay]

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/t ... dtv/222299

Right to Reject gains traction with the Chief Election Commissioner S. Y. Quraishi...

[Pranay]

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/the-9- ... topstories

Right to Reject - TV Debate (BJP spokesperson lacerates Vishnu Som for slanted questions)

[member_22626]

Support the cause
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Campaign ... 5971352441

[nawabs]

Mamata for electoral reforms, cash-free polls

http://in.news.yahoo.com/mamata-elector ... 38157.html

Observing that corrupt practices were rampant in India's electoral process particularly in the northeast, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee Tuesday called for electoral reforms.

"Today valueless politics has become the order of the day. Why do we have to beg for money during elections? I am sorry to say, but in many northeastern states voters are bought with money. One who pays the most wins the elections," said Banerjee.

Speaking in the West Bengal assembly during its platinum jubilee celebrations, Banerjee said the democratic fabric of the country had been weakened by corruption, which was leading to lawlessness.

"Where is democracy today? Accountability should be for everybody. We need to strengthen democracy because a weak democracy leads to rise in lawlessness. We need an electoral process where money would play no role," she said.

She said in states like Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur, voters were bought for money while in a state like Tamil Nadu candidates spent over Rs.20 crore in election campaigns.

"In spite of their desire, good people refrain from entering politics because huge money is required for that. We need immediate electoral reforms so that these corrupt practices are weeded out," said Banerjee.

She added that West Bengal was the only state where the least amount of money is involved during elections.

"The media often twists facts. There is a deliberate attempt to harass the executive. People often indulge in blaming the politicians for everything. But is accountability only for politicians? Accountability is something which should apply to anybody and everybody," added Banerjee.

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 433667.cms

JAIPUR: For the first time in Rajasthan, an election for recalling an elected chairman of a municipal body will be held in Baran district on December 12 in accordance with the amendment to the Rajasthan Municipalities Act passed by the state assembly in March last year. If more than half the total number of voters in the district's Manglore Nagar Palika (municipality) favours the recall, the elected position of chairman - Ashok Jain -will be nullified. The move has been initiated allegedly due to Jain's highhandedness and non-performance.

When TOI contacted Jain, who was elected as an independent candidate in November 2009, he accused Congress legislator from Anta constituency in Baran district Pramod Jain Bhaya of conspiring to remove him from his elected position.

The voting for the recall is being held after the no-confidence motion that was passed by over three-fourth of the elected members of the municipality board on January 4 got clearance at the levels of district election officer, state's local self government department and state election commission.

The municipality board has 20 elected members of which 17 voted against Jain during the no-confidence motion. Of the 17, 10 members were from Congress, five from BJP and one independent.

Rajasthan's state election commissioner A K Pandey said that as per the amendment carried out by the state assembly to the Rajasthan Municipalities Act in March last year, voting for the recall of Ashok Jain will be held on December 12.

A no confidence motion against Jain had been proposed by the members of the municipality board on January 4.

"The members passed the no-confidence motion on January 4. The proposal to recall Jain was submitted to the district election officer. On receiving the intimation, a meeting of the board members was convened in presence of the presiding officer appointed by then district election officer Shravan Kumar on January 12. As 17 members voted against Jain, the district election officer referred the proposal to the local self government department," said the district election officer Sumati Lal Bohra over phone

Meanwhile, Jain approached the Rajasthan high court against the proposal saying that as the councilors of Manglore Nagar Palika had brought a no-confidence motion in the absence of any rules, re-voting for the same position was not possible. However, the state government put into enforcement the amendment to the Rajasthan Municipalities Act in September last year.

State election commissioner A K Pandey said, "the counting of votes will take place on December 14. If over 50% of voters favour the recall, the chairman's position will be nullified," said the officer. He added that the provision to recall a mayor or a chairman of a municipal body also exists in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh states.

Sources said that Jain had associations with the Congress party, however, he chose to fight as independent candidate when he did not get a Congress ticket.

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 144039.cms

Finally - Right to Reject sees the light of day - Thank You Indian Supreme Court

NEW DELHI: In a landmark judgement on Friday, the Supreme Court for the first time allowed voters to cast negative vote by pressing a button saying none of the candidates is worthy of his vote. (Highlights)

The SC asked the Election Commission to provide None Of The Above (NOTA) button on EVMs and ballot papers.

The apex court said the right to vote and the right to say NOTA are both part of basic right of voters.

"When a large number of voters will press NOTA button, it will force political parties to choose better candidates. Negative voting would lead to systemic change in polls," the apex bench observed.

The bench also observed that implementation of NOTA option was akin to 'abstain option' given to MPs and MLAs during voting in respective houses.

The SC directed the EC to start implementing NOTA button on EVMs forthwith in a phased manner and asked the Centre to render all assistance.

A bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam said that negative voting would foster purity and vibrancy of elections and ensure wide participation as people who are not satisfied with the candidates in the fray would also turn up to express their opinion rejecting contestants.

The bench noted that the concept of negative voting is prevalent in 13 countries and even in India, parliamentarians are given an option to press the button for abstaining while voting takes place in the House.

The court said right to reject candidates in elections is part of fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression given by the Constitution to Indian citizens.

It said that democracy is all about choice and significance of right of citizens to cast negative voting is massive.

With the concept of negative voting, the voters who are dissatisfied with the candidates in the fray would turn up in large number to express their opinion which would put unscrupulous elements and impersonators out of the polls, it said.

The bench, while reading out the operative portion of the judgement, did not throw light on a situation in case the votes cast under no option head outnumber the votes got by the candidates.

It said that secrecy of votes cast under the no option category must be maintained by the Election Commission.

The court passed the order on a PIL filed by an NGO, People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) which had submitted that voters be given the right to negative voting.

Agreeing with the NGO's plea, the bench passed the path-breaking verdict and introduced the concept of negative voting in the election process, saying that it would further empower the voters in exercising their franchise.

The latest verdict is part of series of judgements passed by the apex court on the election process.

Earlier, the apex court had restrained people in custody from contesting elections.

The apex court has also ruled that MPs and MLAs would stand disqualified after being convicted of serious crimes. The government has brought an ordinance seeking to negate the court's judgement striking down a provision in the electoral law that protected convicted lawmakers from immediate disqualification.

A two-judge bench of the apex court had felt that the issue on negative voting needed to be adjudicated by a larger bench as there were certain doubts over the interpretation of the ruling passed by a Constitution Bench in the Kuldip Nayar Vs Union of India case relating to a voter's right.

Under the existing provisions of Section 49(O) of the Representation of People Act, a voter who after coming to a polling booth does not want to cast his vote, has to inform the presiding officer of his intention not to vote, who in turn would make an entry in the relevant rule book after taking the signature of the said elector.

According to the PUCL, Section 49(O) was violative of the constitutional provisions guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) (Freedom of Speech and Expression) and Article 21 (Right to Liberty) and violated the concept of secret ballot.
(With inputs from PTI)

[Pranay]

http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=811686

In a path-breaking judgement, the Supreme Court today held that voters have a right to reject all candidates contesting polls in a constituency by pressing a button for negative vote, saying this would compel political parties to field "sound" candidates who are known for their integrity.

The Election Commission will now have to provide an option for negative voting in the Electronic Voting Machines and ballot papers.

The verdict, however, appeared to raise questions over what happens if majority of electorate in a constituency vote negatively.

Election Commission sources said though the electoral law on the issue is silent, the new 'none of the above' (NOTA) option may virtually amount to an invalid vote and those getting the highest votes among the candidates will be declared the winner.

The apex court said there is a "dire need" of negative voting which will bring "systemic change" in the election process as "the political parties will be forced to accept the will of the people" and field clean candidates when a large number of people express their disapproval with the candidates being put up by them.

It said casting of the vote is a facet of the right of expression of an individual and the said right is provided under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and "not allowing a person to cast vote negatively defeats the very freedom of expression and the right ensured in Article 21, i.e. the right to liberty".

While Congress and BJP reacted cautiously to the verdict, CPI(M) said it has created an "abnormal situation" that needs to be corrected.

A bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam said that negative voting, which is prevalent only in 13 countries across the world, would accelerate effective political participation of people and will "foster the purity of the electoral process" and "it serves a very fundamental and essential part of a vibrant democracy.

"For democracy to survive, it is essential that the best available men should be chosen as people’s representatives for proper governance of the country. This can be best achieved through men of high moral and ethical values, who win the elections on a positive vote."

"Thus in a vibrant democracy, the voter must be given an opportunity to choose none of the above button, which will indeed compel the political parties to nominate a sound candidate. This situation palpably tells us the dire need of negative voting," the bench said its 50-page verdict.

[Pranay]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-24294995

India's Supreme Court has ruled that voters have the right to reject all candidates in elections.

It ordered the Election Commission to provide a button on the voting machine which would give voters the option to choose "none of the above".

The judges said the negative voting would help cleanse the political system in the country.

The option will be available to voters in the assembly polls due in five states later this year.

"Democracy is all about choices and voters will be empowered by this right of negative voting," a bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam said in its order on Friday.

The judges said that this "would lead to a systemic change in polls and political parties will be forced to project clean candidates".

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 169193.cms

NEW DELHI: The Election Commission on Friday said it would straight away implement the Supreme Court judgment directing it to provide a "None of the Above" button on electronic voting machines (EVMs). The button can be pressed by a voter to reject all the candidates in a poll in case he finds them unsuitable.

"The EC welcomes the Supreme Court order, which has upheld its long-pending proposal in this regard. It will help maintain the secrecy of ballot for those who want to record a negative/neutral vote on the EVM," a senior EC functionary told TOI. The functionary added that the 'None of the Above' (NOTA) option will be displayed on EVMs in all future elections, the first being the assembly polls to five states due in November.

"In accordance with the order of the Supreme Court, 'NOTA' shall be printed in a separate panel on the ballot paper below the name of the last contesting candidate. This ballot paper shall be affixed on the ballot unit of the EVM. If the voter presses the button next to NOTA, his desire not to vote for any of the candidates in the fray will get recorded in the EVM in secrecy," the EC said in a press release on Friday.

"Commission shall also make appropriate changes in Part-2 of Form 17C used during counting and the result sheet in Form 20 to separately compile the number of persons who used the option not to vote for any of the candidates in the fray," the EC said, adding that it would issue detailed instructions to ensure compliance with the order of the court as expeditiously as possible.

Incidentally, commission sources explained that the NOTA option would not effect the result of an election where over 50 per cent of the electorate chose to cast negative/neutral votes. As former CEC N Gopalaswami explained to TOI, "Even if 90 voters in an electorate of 100 persons press the NOTA button, the poll will be decided in favour of the candidate who gets the maximum of the remaining 10 votes".

The proposal for negative/neutral voting was first made by the commission in December 2001, during the tenure of JM Lyngdoh, and then reiterated and pushed by the then chief election commissioner TS Krishnamurthy in July 2004. As per the EC's proposal, though the facility of registering a negative/neutral vote was already provided under Section 49-O of the conduct of election rules, secrecy was maintainable only in a ballot system. The system in the EVMs, which has now become the mainstay of elections, however was different and tended to compromise the secrecy of vote in as much as the polling officials and polling agents got to know about the decision of the voter not to cast this vote.

It was to ensure secrecy of neutral/negative votes in the age of EVMs that the EC made this proposal first to the law ministry, former CEC N Gopalaswami told TOI. He said the government, however, sat on the proposal, which then became the matter of a PIL filed by PUCL. The government, however, submitted in the apex court that the writ was not maintainable as 'right to vote' was neither a fundamental nor a constitutional right, but only a statutory right.

"The government had probably sensed the potential of the proposal being upgraded to a 'right to reject' all candidates in the future, which would invalidate any election where the negative voting option has been exercised in over 50% cases," a former bureaucrat pointed out.

The EC, on its part, backed the PUCL prayer to the apex court. This was in line with the view taken by its proposal submitted in 2004, recommending that the law be amended to specifically provide for negative/neutral voting. "For this purpose, Rules 22 and 49B of the conduct of election rules, 1961, may be suitably amended, adding a proviso that in the ballot paper and the particulars on the ballot unit, in the column relating to names of candidates, after the entry relating to the last candidate, there shall be a column 'none of the above' to enable a voter to reject all the candidates," the EC proposed.

However, Gopalaswami said the "right not to vote" was different from " right to reject" as the neutral votes cast would be set aside while deciding the result of an election. "At most, neutral voting is a step closer to 'right to reject', which may necessitate a re-election if a majority of candidates choose to reject all the candidates," he noted.

[rgsrini]

^^It is toothless. It is not "Right to Reject". What has been approved is actually "Right not to vote". It will have no impact on scumbags getting elected.

Here is the crux of this toothless judgement.

As former CEC N Gopalaswami explained to TOI, "Even if 90 voters in an electorate of 100 persons press the NOTA button, the poll will be decided in favour of the candidate who gets the maximum of the remaining 10 votes".

[krisna]

wonder how many will recall this.

[subhamoy.das]

^^It is toothless. It is not "Right to Reject". What has been approved is actually "Right not to vote". It will have no impact on scumbags getting elected.

Here is the crux of this toothless judgement.

As former CEC N Gopalaswami explained to TOI, "Even if 90 voters in an electorate of 100 persons press the NOTA button, the poll will be decided in favour of the candidate who gets the maximum of the remaining 10 votes".

This is a joke and will make the win margins wafer thin. If this is followed by a rule which will nullify the poll if say 30% of votes are not cast then that would be effective to fielding good candidates.

[SBajwa]

The next steps are

1. Mandatory holiday on the polling day or pick a Sunday so that everybody could vote.
2. Compulsory voting otherwise some fine.
3. If 51% of the people vote for "none of the above" then re poll in that constituency with new candidates.