One of the first things I remember from my Civics class in school is mugging up the Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties of an Indian citizen. It did not make much sense back then, but I distinctly remember that one of my duties as a citizen was to vote when I was eligible to. Well, I also remember that the Prime Minister was responsible for the 'development' and that the President/Governor was an apolitical member in the state's machinery. So much for education.
I have voted every single time. Initially for the thrill of it, and then with real thought. My corporator is the wife of an ex-HAL employee who had a windfall when he sold his land and whom I had never seen before in my life; I still voted. My government put up MLAs for sale like the IPL auction; I still voted. Ministers were caught watching porn in the assembly, people who could not read and write were given ministerial berths; I still voted. And now, I don't want to. It is not because I don't feel a responsibility to 'vote for change', but because I am not satisfied with the choice.
If somebody gives you 5 rotten apples and tells you to choose one, what would you do? I would not choose any. In fact, 'I made a choice not to choose'. In that scenario, one cannot accuse me of failing in my duty. Giving nothing to choose from and accusing the citizen of failing in his/her duty is heresy. Wise men back then told 'vote wisely', not just vote. Anyway, this again brings up the topic of "null vote" or "reject-all-candidates" where the voter can register to vote and also exercise his vote but in fact makes a choice of not choosing any of the candidates. This is exactly what I want and also many people across the country. Believe it or not, I have asked Kiran Bedi about this (through social media) and she did mention that this is on the Lokpal's primary objectives.
So, is this not present in the current system? It is. It is called Rule 49-O. A registered voter can excercise his null vote. So why is it not effective? Firstly, the paper ballot had this option where the voter could drop a blank paper; but the EVMs do not have this. The voter needs to personally tell the election officer that he wants to exercise a null-vote. This is a bloody violation of the rights of the citizen! His choice should be a secret. Also, the logic of the null vote should ideally be: if the total number of null votes in a constituency is greater than the number of votes of the winning candidate of the constituency, that election is considered to "null and void". However, in our case: the null votes are just discarded and the winner is chosen. This system is just to provide to solace to those people who want to get a sense of satisfaction by voting, but the vote really makes no difference.
I wonder if I am actually failing in my duty when I don't vote this time. Maybe I will get that mark on my finger, pretend that I made a difference and feel happy. But I hope somebody gives a good choice this time around. One good apple and I will take it, does not matter who is giving it.
