Uncontested Electoral Victory | 30 Apr 2024

Source: TH

Why in News?

Recently, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) candidate from the Surat Lok Sabha constituency in Gujarat has been declared elected unopposed.

• This follows the rejection of the nomination papers of the other candidates and the withdrawal of nominations by other candidates.

What are the Requirements for Valid Nomination?

• Section 33 of the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951 contains the requirements for a valid nomination.
  • An elector above 25 years of age can contest the Lok Sabha election from any constituency in India.
  • The proposer(s) of the candidate should be an elector(s) from the respective constituency where the nomination is being filed.
  • In the case of a recognised party (national or State), the candidate needs to have one proposer.
  • Candidates set up by unrecognised parties and independents need to be subscribed by ten proposers.
  • A candidate can file up to four nomination papers with different sets of proposers.
    • This is to enable the acceptance of the nomination of a candidate even if one set of nomination papers is in order.
• Section 36 of the RP Act sets out the law concerning the scrutiny of nomination papers by the Returning Officer (RO).
  • It provides that the RO shall not reject any nomination for a defect that is not substantial. However, it specifies that the signature of the candidate or proposer found not genuine is grounds for rejection.
• Section 53 (3) of the RPA, 1951 deals with the procedure in uncontested elections.
  • According to this provision, if the number of such candidates is less than the number of seats to be filled, the RO shall forthwith declare all such candidates to be elected.
• The RO's actions are governed by Section 33 of the Act, which pertains to the presentation of nomination papers and requirements for a valid nomination.

What Led to Nomination Rejection in Surat Lok Sabha constituency?

• The candidate of the Congress party for the Surat constituency filed three sets of nomination papers.
• A BJP worker objected to the candidate of the Congress party, alleging that the signatures of his proposers were not genuine.
• The RO received affidavits from the proposers claiming that they had not signed the nomination papers.
  • As the proposers could not be produced before the RO within the stipulated time, all three sets of nomination papers were rejected.
• The nomination of the Congress party's substitute candidate, was also rejected for the same reason.
• This paved the way for the BJP candidate, to be declared the winner unopposed.

What Does Legal Recourse Entail?

• Article 329(b) of the Constitution read with the RPA, 1951 provides that no election shall be called into question except by an election petition before the concerned High Court.
  • One of the grounds on which such an election petition can be filed is an improper rejection of nomination papers. Hence, the legal recourse available is to file an election petition in the Gujarat High Court.
  • The RP Act provides that High Courts shall endeavour to conclude such trials within six months, which has mostly not been followed in the past.
  • Speedy disposal of election petitions would be a step in the right direction.

What are the Concerns Regarding Declaring Results in Uncontested Elections?

• Democratic Implications:
  • Uncontested victories raise questions about the legality of declaring candidates elected without a competitive electoral process, potentially undermining the democratic principle of representation.
  • The system favours contesting candidates, as the RPA allows for a complete boycott to result in zero votes for all candidates.
  • This contradicts the idea of democracy and raises questions about potential reforms such as introducing a minimum percentage of votes for winning candidates or transferring uncontested seats to nominated individuals.
• Voter Engagement and Choice:
  • Uncontested elections limit voter engagement and choice, depriving constituents of the opportunity to express their preferences through the electoral process.
  • In an uncontested election, there is a victor but no "vanquished" party. Those who are ruled out under the Rules or voluntarily withdraw are effectively denied the opportunity to contest.
  • This process does not allow electors to exercise the None of the Above (NOTA) option, which was introduced to "enlighten" political parties and candidates about voters' perceptions.
    • The NOTA option, however, has been criticised as a "toothless tiger" as it does not impact the election process in any meaningful way, despite it receiving over 1.29 crore votes in the last five years.
      • There are instances where political parties received fewer votes than NOTA.
    • The EC's position is that the candidate with the most votes in any constituency will still be declared the winner, regardless of the number of NOTA votes.
    • However, in Maharashtra, for local bodies' polls, NOTA is treated as a fictional candidate, and if NOTA receives the highest votes, the Commission will conduct a re-poll.
    • The Supreme Court recently asked the Election Commission to respond to a plea for fresh elections in constituencies where NOTA received the majority of votes.
  • Under Rule 49-O of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, electors can choose to refuse to vote, and the presiding officer must remark the records.
    • Such an option gives the voter the right to express his disapproval of the kind of candidates being put up by the parties.
    • There is a difference between an elector exercising Rule 49-O and one using the NOTA option.
      • In the case of the former, the likelihood of such an elector compromising his or her secrecy is high, as there is a procedure to be followed manually at a polling booth. However, in the case of the latter, there is no such issue.

Way Forward

• Amending the First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) System:
  • The FPTP system is also known as the simple majority system. In this voting method, the candidate with the highest number of votes in a constituency is declared the winner.
    • While FPTP is relatively simple, it does not always allow for a truly representative mandate, as the candidate could win despite securing less than half the votes in a contest.
  • Consider introducing a minimum percentage of votes required for the winning candidate to address the issue of candidates being elected without a significant mandate.
• Handling Lack of Candidates:
  • Explore the possibility of transferring the seat to the nominated category, where the President of India can nominate a person as per prescribed qualifications if no candidate offers themselves for elections.
• Strengthening the NOTA Option:
  • Investigate ways to make the NOTA option more impactful, potentially by considering it as a valid vote and incorporating it into the electoral process in a meaningful way, ensuring that voter dissatisfaction is reflected in election results.
• Speedy Disposal of Election Petitions:
  • Ensure expedited resolution of election petitions filed in cases of nomination rejections or electoral disputes.
  • High Courts should endeavour to conclude such trials within the stipulated time frame of six months, promoting timely justice delivery and accountability.