Confusion of Section 49-O
Long back I got a mail from one of my friends, saying that there is a Section 49-O in the Indian constitution that empowers the voter to declare to the poll booth officer that he does not want to vote to any of the candidates, after properly identifying himself, and getting his finger marked with the Ink.
The poll booth officer has to record it in a form called Form 17. While counting, if the votes recorded in form 17 is greater than the maximum votes received by the winning candidate, then it is deemed that all the candidates are rejected by that particular electorate and, all of them are disqualified to contest in the re-election from that electorate.
What a powerful tool! Why did no one tell us about this so far ? We have been independent for the past 60+ years. Constitution was put in way back isn't it?
After a bit of research on the net, I figured, that our constitution does not have any such Section! For that matter, our constitution does not have Sections at all!!!!!
Constitution of India is made of "Articles". (As of today, thats my understanding, By no means, I claim to be an expert)
Don't despair, this is not a hoax but a minor misunderstanding.
Here is the excerpt of Section 49(o) of 'Conduct of Election Rules 1961'
49-O. Elector deciding not to vote.-If an elector, after his electoral roll number has been duly entered in the register of voters in Form-17A and has put his signature or thumb impression thereon as required under sub-rule (1) of rule 49L, decided not to record his vote, a remark to this effect shall be made against the said entry in Form 17A by the presiding officer and the signature or thumb impression of the elector shall be obtained against such remark.
Here is the link that tells what the poll booth officer needs to do in such scenario. In case you decide to do this, please know that you are well within your rights to do so, and what the officer is supposed to is detailed in the Hand book of the Presiding Officer.
http://archive.eci.gov.in/handbook/PRESIDING%20OFFICER.pdf
Here is the link that gives the complete text of "THE CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS RULES, 1961"
http://lawmin.nic.in/ld/subord/cer1.htm
Can you imagine the power of this ? All the eternal cribbers who claim that they don't vote, because they are not happy with the candidates can actually go to the booth and register their voice!
The candidates will wake up to the fact that the 60% of the people who don't vote cant be taken lightly!
Adds teeth to the bite!
Now before we go into an euphoric state, lets face the facts, do you actually think that you can go to the booth and tell the officer that you don't want to vote, and actually walk out of the booth? Would'nt the agents from the candidates know that you did this ? Will they let you walk ?
I can hear you ask, hey but my ballot was supposed to be secret is'nt it ?
Answer is yes, it is. Even Supreme Court can not ask you to reveal who did you vote for! So how the hell could this be used ?
Same question asked by The Election Commission, the one aspect of Indian democracy that has shown some back bone.
Excerpt from the Recommendations of the electoral reforms by the Election Commission of India, to the Government of India.
7. Negative / neutral voting
The Commission has received proposals from a very large number of individuals and organizations that there should be provision enabling a voter to reject all the candidates in the constituency if he does not find them suitable. In the voting using the conventional ballot paper and ballot boxes, an elector can drop the ballot paper without marking his vote against any of the candidates, if he chooses so. However, in the voting using the Electronic Voting Machines, such a facility is not available to the voter. Although, Rule 49 O of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 provides that an elector may refuse to vote after he has been identified and necessary entries made in the Register of Electors and the marked copy of the electoral roll, the secrecy of voting is not protected here inasmuch as the polling officials and the polling agents in the polling station get to know about the decision of such a voter.
The Commission recommends that the law should 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 name 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, if he chooses so. Such a proposal was earlier made by the Commission in 2001 (vide letter dated 10.12.2001).
(A petition by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties seeking such a provision filed at the time of the recent general elections is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court)
The complete proposal can be read from the following link:
http://www.eci.gov.in/Press/current/PN_030804.pdf
Now, the question begs itself, what is the current status ? What decision has been made to implement this recommendation ?
If there has not been a decision, why it has not been taken ? What are the blocks that are being faced? What is stopping the Hon'ble Supreme Court to arrive at a conclusion?
If a decision has been made, where can we get the information ?
Will RTI help?
The poll booth officer has to record it in a form called Form 17. While counting, if the votes recorded in form 17 is greater than the maximum votes received by the winning candidate, then it is deemed that all the candidates are rejected by that particular electorate and, all of them are disqualified to contest in the re-election from that electorate.
What a powerful tool! Why did no one tell us about this so far ? We have been independent for the past 60+ years. Constitution was put in way back isn't it?
After a bit of research on the net, I figured, that our constitution does not have any such Section! For that matter, our constitution does not have Sections at all!!!!!
Constitution of India is made of "Articles". (As of today, thats my understanding, By no means, I claim to be an expert)
Don't despair, this is not a hoax but a minor misunderstanding.
Here is the excerpt of Section 49(o) of 'Conduct of Election Rules 1961'
49-O. Elector deciding not to vote.-If an elector, after his electoral roll number has been duly entered in the register of voters in Form-17A and has put his signature or thumb impression thereon as required under sub-rule (1) of rule 49L, decided not to record his vote, a remark to this effect shall be made against the said entry in Form 17A by the presiding officer and the signature or thumb impression of the elector shall be obtained against such remark.
Here is the link that tells what the poll booth officer needs to do in such scenario. In case you decide to do this, please know that you are well within your rights to do so, and what the officer is supposed to is detailed in the Hand book of the Presiding Officer.
http://archive.eci.gov.in/handbook/PRESIDING%20OFFICER.pdf
Here is the link that gives the complete text of "THE CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS RULES, 1961"
http://lawmin.nic.in/ld/subord/cer1.htm
Can you imagine the power of this ? All the eternal cribbers who claim that they don't vote, because they are not happy with the candidates can actually go to the booth and register their voice!
The candidates will wake up to the fact that the 60% of the people who don't vote cant be taken lightly!
Adds teeth to the bite!
Now before we go into an euphoric state, lets face the facts, do you actually think that you can go to the booth and tell the officer that you don't want to vote, and actually walk out of the booth? Would'nt the agents from the candidates know that you did this ? Will they let you walk ?
I can hear you ask, hey but my ballot was supposed to be secret is'nt it ?
Answer is yes, it is. Even Supreme Court can not ask you to reveal who did you vote for! So how the hell could this be used ?
Same question asked by The Election Commission, the one aspect of Indian democracy that has shown some back bone.
Excerpt from the Recommendations of the electoral reforms by the Election Commission of India, to the Government of India.
7. Negative / neutral voting
The Commission has received proposals from a very large number of individuals and organizations that there should be provision enabling a voter to reject all the candidates in the constituency if he does not find them suitable. In the voting using the conventional ballot paper and ballot boxes, an elector can drop the ballot paper without marking his vote against any of the candidates, if he chooses so. However, in the voting using the Electronic Voting Machines, such a facility is not available to the voter. Although, Rule 49 O of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 provides that an elector may refuse to vote after he has been identified and necessary entries made in the Register of Electors and the marked copy of the electoral roll, the secrecy of voting is not protected here inasmuch as the polling officials and the polling agents in the polling station get to know about the decision of such a voter.
The Commission recommends that the law should 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 name 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, if he chooses so. Such a proposal was earlier made by the Commission in 2001 (vide letter dated 10.12.2001).
(A petition by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties seeking such a provision filed at the time of the recent general elections is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court)
The complete proposal can be read from the following link:
http://www.eci.gov.in/Press/current/PN_030804.pdf
Now, the question begs itself, what is the current status ? What decision has been made to implement this recommendation ?
If there has not been a decision, why it has not been taken ? What are the blocks that are being faced? What is stopping the Hon'ble Supreme Court to arrive at a conclusion?
If a decision has been made, where can we get the information ?
Will RTI help?
posted by the g at 12:22 PM
1 comments
