None of the above: Exercising the right to reject

Image: Tribune.com.pk

The right to choose leaders is one of the most cherished freedoms in a democracy.  

A voter casts his vote for the candidate he wants and hopes for the best. But what is a voter to do if none of the candidates catches his fancy? Does the right to suffrage include the right to reject too? 

The issue has, in fact, attracted considerable attention recently. In India, the Supreme Court has come out with a landmark ruling granting voters the right to reject. The High Court has ordered the Election Commission to provide a “None Of The Above” (NOTA) button on the e-voting  machine, commenting that negative voting would help cleanse the political system in the country.

In the decision, the high court said that "Democracy is all about choices and voters will be empowered by this right of negative voting." 

It added that such a right to reject would lead to a “systemic change in polls and political parties will be forced to project clean candidates".

Aside from India, negative voting is also a fixture in the election systems of Greece, the US State of Nevada, Ukraine, Spain and Colombia.  Russia experimented with negative voting but abolished such in 2006. 

Pakistan also had a None of the Above option in the ballot until the government  dropped it in 2013, saying that elections were meant to "elect and not reject".

Just how significant is this ruling giving voters the right to reject? Many analysts say that such a mechanism puts political parties on notice that voters would no longer put up with mediocre candidates. Voters hitherto resigned to choosing the “least evil” among the lot could suddenly find themselves with the power to reject.  

Yet advocates are apprehensive about the development noting that the right to reject would only be truly efficacious if it materially affects the outcome of elections. They ask, for instance, about the effect of NOTA getting the most number of votes. Will it result in forcing the government to conduct other elections with better candidates? 

Some note with concern that while India e-voting machines will now feature the NOTA button, the candidate who gets the second most number of votes will still be declared winner, rendering the whole effort moot.

The Colombian race for election automation

Bogotá. Photo: Miguel Vaca

A very important deadline is coming up in the Colombian electoral calendar: by 2014, e-voting should have been implemented for the upcoming Senate and House of Representatives elections. However, so little has been done to that end, that the chance of meeting the goal is slim.

For many Colombians, the fact that their government set a deadline for the implementation of e-voting might come off as a surprise. This is because there is not enough information about this project available to the public, as it seems to have been left stagnant by a lack of budget stemming from the disinterest shown by the central government so far. However, the National Registrar, Carlos Ariel Sánchez, stated that e-voting is necessary to simplify the country’s complex multiple election system used to elect senators, house representatives, and members of the City Council of Bogotá.

At least some steps have been taken to advance the project, though. In recent days, the National Registrar presented three options to the Electronic Voting Advisory Commission for the potential method to be adopted: paper ballots with automatic scrutiny, touchscreen devices with no vote receipt, and touchscreen devices with vote receipt. The commission will evaluate the three models in terms of their reliability, accessibility, precision, and auditability. It goes without saying that in terms of voting machines, those that emit printed voting receipts will always be preferable to those that don’t. According to Barbara Simons, member of the Election Assistance Commission Board of Advisors, all computers used in an election must be audited, and for that reason “there must always be physical records [of the ballots cast electronically], that is, paper receipts.”

E-voting is ideal for multiple elections, as it enables the display of the equivalent of several paper ballots on a single touchscreen, thus reducing costs and making it easier for voters to participate. In fact, it has already proven successful in different countries, even recently. Therefore, it would be absolutely beneficial for the Colombian authorities to step up their game and raise the level of importance of e-voting in their agenda and budget.

It is highly plausible that Colombia will delay the implementation of e-voting, but this is preferable to hastening the process just to meet the deadline, which can lead to completely undesirable results. As for now, the South American country is already implementing biometric authentication in its upcoming elections, and pilot tests for voting machines will be held during political parties’ internal referenda. Fortunately, it seems the road to automation for Colombia has not been completely forsaken, after all.

Jennifer McCoy Discusses E-voting

Jennifer McCoy, director of the Carter Center's Americas Program, spoke about Colombia's recent decision to implement e-voting for the Colombian digital magazine Razón Pública. This is what she had to say (in Spanish):

(If you cannot see the embedded video, you can find it here.)

Here is a translation of her declaration:

"When a society decides to change its voting system, it is important that there is a lot of consultation with political parties, and that there is transparency. Transparency is the most important thing here. Educating and informing voters is also very important, so that they understand the new systems and these can be implemented effectively.

However, if there is no transparency and no information, there can be problems of lack of understanding, suspicion, etc.

Estonia has already adopted an Internet-based voting system. It is interesting to find that there actually are developing countries that have adopted automated voting systems. India, for example, and Brazil, where voting has been almost completely automated. Bolivia has no e-voting, but biometric identification of its citizens was implemented there last year.

In short, it is possible for developing countries to use high-tech voting systems."