Voter has rights to negative voting, says Supreme Court

For a vibrant democracy, voter has right to negative voting - the option of rejecting all candidates in the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and ballot papers, said Supreme Court on Friday in a significant verdict.

Pronouncing its verdict in a Public Interest Litigation, the apex court bench of Chief Justice P Sathasivam, Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai and Justice Ranjan Gogoi Friday said that the voter has the right to negative voting by rejecting all the candidates in fray by exercising the option of None of the Above (NOTA) in EVMs and ballot papers.

"Negative voting would gradually lead to systemic changes as political parties will have to respect the will of the people in selecting their candidates. It is necessary and vibrant part of democracy," the bench said in its judgment.

The court directed the election commission to introduce a button providing for NOTA in the EVMs and also in the ballot papers.

It asked the central government to provide all assistance to the election commission in introducing NOTA option in the EVMs and ballot papers.

The People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) had moved the apex court in 2004 with a plea that voters should have a right to negative vote, saying that it does not want to vote any of the candidates listed in EVM.

It had sought directions to Election Commission (EC) to make provision in the EVMs providing option "None of the Above" and the right to say NOTA should be kept secret.

The apex court bench of Justice B.N.Agrawal (since retired) and Justice G.S.Singhvi by their Feb 23, 2009 judgment while referring the matter to a larger bench had framed two questions for the court to examine "whether the right of voter to exercise his choice for the candidate is a necessary concomitant of the voter's freedom of expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution".

The court on the second aspect had said, "We are further of the view that width and amplitude of the power of the (Election) Commission under Article 324 needs further consideration by a larger Bench in the light of the (earlier) judgments of this court whereby the elector's right to be informed about the assets and antecedents of the persons seeking election to the legislature has been duly recognized".

--With IANS Inputs--