& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Electoral reforms: Moving backwards

Shakhawat Liton
The Indian Supreme Court, in a landmark judgement at the end of last September, ordered for providing Indian citizens with the right to exercise an option of negative voting and to reject all candidates as unworthy of being elected as Member of Parliament.
In defence, the court said negative voting would foster honesty and vibrancy in elections. Negative voting would lead to systemic change in polls and political parties will be forced to nominate clean candidates, it asserted, noting that the concept of negative voting is prevalent in 13 countries.
"If right to vote is statutory right, right to reject candidate is fundamental right of speech and expression under Constitution [of India)," the court stated further, adding that democracy is all about choice and significance of right of citizens to cast negative voting is massive.
What the India is thinking now about introduction of 'no' vote, the Bangladesh Election Commission (EC) had thought about it boldly more than seven years ago and took a landmark step forward. With a farsighted approach, the then EC, led by A.T.M. Shamsul Huda, had moved to introduce the 'no' vote provision empowering voters to reject all candidates in a constituency unworthy of being elected as lawmakers.
Major political parties participating in the talks with the EC in 2007, and also in 2008, on the proposed electoral reforms, however, had strongly opposed to the proposed introduction of the 'no' vote provision. But the EC stuck to its gun. In defence, it made almost the same arguments the Indian Supreme Court made in the September judgement on the'no'vote.
The EC led by Huda was fortunate as a partisan government was not in office when they moved for bringing sweeping electoral reforms. A caretaker government led by Fakhruddin Ahmed was in office. And the interim government did not oppose the EC's bid to introduce the 'no' vote provision in the RPO, the legal framework for conducting the general election.The provision was introduced in 2008, empowering the EC to hold re-election in a constituency where more than 50% of the voters rejected all candidates.
The 'no' vote provision could not exert much impact on the December 29, 2008 parliamentary polls. Only around four lakh people voted 'no' in the polls. But the Awami League, which assumed office through the December 29 election, did not like the provision. It considered the provision as a threat to the political parties' unlimited freedom to nominate anybody, and ask the people to vote for him/her. The AL assumed office in January, 2009 and abolished the 'no' vote provision the next month. By scrapping the provision, the AL-led government clearly pushed back the spirit of the electoral reforms done during the past caretaker government.
In a latest move, the AL-led government in October this
year cancelled another RPO provision on time bar, which had required affiliation with a party for at least three years for getting nomination. Cancellation of this provision will allow people to change parties and permit businessmen to join any party anytime ahead of the next polls to contest the election managing tickets on payment of huge amount. This will bring about and boost nomination trading in the next polls.
The story did not end there. Along with cancellation of the 'no' vote provision, the AL-led government a few years ago amended the RPO, making political parties' grassroots level committees powerless again regarding picking parties' parliamentary candidates. The provision included in the RPO in 2008 empowered the grassroots level committees to prepare a panel of prospective candidates for each constituency and forward it to the party's parliamentary board to pick one from it. After the RPO amendment, it is now the discretion of the parliamentary boards of parties to consider the panels prepared by the grassroots level committees.
In February 2009, the AL-led government also scrapped the armed forces' sweeping power to discharge their election duties to maintain law and order. The AL did not support giving the armed forces this power before the 2001 parliamentary polls. And it questioned the role of some army officials engaged in 2001 polls after the party suffered a defeat in the battle of ballots. Taking a u-turn during the army-backed caretaker government led by Fakhruddin, the AL accepted it. But it abolished the provision after assuming power. After cancellation of this provision, it is now uncertain whether the armed forces will be deployed for election duties or not.
The AL-led government has brought some other changes in the RPO, increasing the ceiling of candidates' election expenses and their security deposits, and of donations for political parties.
But the government rejected a proposal made by the EC seeking the power to monitor candidates' election expenses during electioneering. The EC had also sought the authority to devise its own method of monitoring.
The government also rejected EC's proposal for award- ing punishment to individuals for furnishing false information or concealing any information in the nomination paper or in the affidavit. The EC had proposed that an individual would be disqualified for contesting the parliamentary polls for such offence.
So, weakness in the present provision for disclosure of candidates' 8-point particulars remains. This will allow individuals willing to contest the polls to furnish false information or conceal any information about themselves. This will deprive voters knowledge about candidates before casting their votes.
The government also refused to introduce a provision for punishing individuals and government officials for negligence in duties assigned by the EC or for their refusal to assist the EC.
Moreover, the present EC formed during the present government in February 2012 though through a search committee could not portray the image of a strong EC. Many blamed the poor appointment for the current situation in the EC, which was also mired in controversy for a move to scrap its power to cancel one's candidacy in the polls on ground of severe electoral offences. In face of huge criticism, it changed its position. But the controversy contributed to eroded public confidence in the EC.
The above instances have proved that the present government could not move forward with the electoral reforms. Rather, it has been moving backwards since it assumed office in January 2009.
The government's failure to bring necessary reforms to strengthen the electoral system and the EC stands in the way to holding the general election under a partisan government after cancellation of the non-party caretaker administration in June 2011. The EC could not garner public confidence that it will able to hold a free and fair parliamentary election under the present AL-led government. This situation has strengthened the demand for a nonpartisan election time government.
The writer is Senior Reporter, The Daily Star.