The central government recently supported a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition that seeks to remove the None of the Above (NOTA) option from Rajya Sabha polls. The Centre asserts that employing NOTA in indirect elections, such as those for the Rajya Sabha, could encourage horse-trading, corruption, and extra constitutional methods designed to defeat party candidates.
Origins of NOTA Use in Rajya Sabha Elections
The Election Commission of India (ECI) issued a circular in 2014 permitting Rajya Sabha members to opt for NOTA in their elections. However, the Chief Justice of India has stated that NOTA is intended exclusively for universal adult suffrage and direct elections, not for elections carried out under a system of proportional representation through singular transferable vote, like that of the Rajya Sabha.
Political Responses and Legal Concerns
Various political parties have expressed dissatisfaction with the ECI’s decision, arguing it contradicts the principle of Open ballot systems used in Rajya Sabha and Legislative council polls. The Apex Court notes that NOTA’s purpose is to allow voters to log a protest vote, which isn’t applicable in scenarios like the Rajya Sabha where preferences must be disclosed along party lines, reducing the ability of a voter to position a candidate first and then resort to NOTA.
Additionally, Rajya Sabha MPs who vote against their party’s directives do not risk disqualification, as no party can issue a whip in these elections. The PIL petitioner has further argued that the Election Commission cannot contradict the provisions of Article 80 (4), which states Rajya Sabha members should be elected following a system of proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote.
However, the Election Commission rejected arguments against NOTA, asserting that every individual not only has the right to vote but also the right not to vote.
Understanding NOTA
The NOTA option allows voters to record their disapproval of all candidates in a voting system. The Supreme Court’s judgement in the case of PUCL v. Union of India in 2013 instructed the use of NOTA in direct elections to the Lok Sabha and respective State Assemblies. The judgement articulated that, in a direct election, voters should be provided with an option to choose “None of the above” to express their dissatisfaction with all the candidates or political parties on the ballot.
Improving NOTA’s Impact
For NOTA to be a powerful tool, it needs to evolve into a ‘Right to Reject,’ rather than merely being a mechanism to express discontent. A comprehensive consensus must be established before arriving at any final conclusion.
