NOTA or nothing

A small but significant victory for all

Among the several decisions the Supreme Court of Pakistan took on June 8, 2012 regarding electoral reforms, the order of implementation of the None of the Above (NOTA) option on ballots remained a small but significant victory for smaller parties and plurality in Pakistan’s democracy as a whole.

While the rest of the year went by without further news and updates on the implementation of the NOTA option, this year, in January 2013, Awami Worker’s Party (AWP) President Abid Hasan Minto filed a petition in the Supreme Court, alleging that the ECP had not complied with the court order, adding that with the elections around the corner, it was detrimental that the NOTA be implemented soon.

Even then, at least three months had passed when rumors began to float that ECP was implementing the court order for the upcoming elections. Coupled with fake degrees’ arrests, the nuisance of Returning Officers and their rejections, this NOTA option spooked mainstream political parties even more.

Within hours of the news breaking, messages of “disappointment” began coming in from various political quarters, saying that this move would “weaken” democracy, cause unnecessary election expenditure, and may lead to seats remaining vacant. Critics of the NOTA ballot argued that this option is not used by other countries. Furthermore, there was a sinister whisper that this was a ploy of the army to delay the elections.

And almost overnight, the rumor was squashed, with ECP officials saying that the implementation of the order would require massive amounts of red-tape, including prime minister’s recommendation to the president and the issuance of an ordinance by the latter.

While one may understand the national paranoia surrounding the upcoming elections, one does wonder how serious the ECP is about implementing the electoral reforms ruling. While the leaders are patting themselves on the back, hailing the “smooth” transition of democracy, it must be remembered that these very leaders have made it next to impossible for smaller political parties to make space for themselves in Pakistan’s political spectrum.

Pakistan’s electioneering system is designed to cater to big political parties with deep pockets. For example, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Past the Post rule be abolished; a rule that generally encourages two-party competition. It is also true that the winner via First Past the Post is not always a representative of the majority. Yet, the rule still stands for the upcoming general elections.

The NOTA ballot would have been a significant step in establishing plurality in the early stages of the establishment of real democracy. What is NOTA? By having the None of the Above option on the ballot, the voter will be given a right to reject the candidates hopeful for seats in his constituency. Simply put, NOTA is based on the principle that the very foundations of consent is the ability to withhold assent.

When NOTA is listed on a ballot, there is the possibility of it receiving a majority, and hence winning, vote. In such a case, there are a variety of options available; the seat could remain vacant, could be filled by appointment, nominations re-opened or holding another election. Either way, it does not limit the options of voters to big names representing big political parties. It allows them to lodge their protest against the status quo and reject all candidates.

NOTA is not universally used in all countries, but it is exercised in several places, for example the former Soviet Union. In the 1991 election, over 100 representatives of the Communist Party were defeated by the NOTA.

NOTA does not have to be always about rejections. As in Spain’s case NOTA (or voto en blanco) stands as a statistical indicator of the candidates’ popularity. In Spain, the NOTA ballots only increase the amount of valid votes, raising the threshold of votes which every political party has to overcome to be fully considered. The parties over the threshold then get their seats according to the D’Hondt method.

The United Kingdom, too, has had an entertaining relationship with NOTA. No Candidate Deserves My Vote! was registered as a political party in November 2000. The No Candidate Deserves My Vote party’s single objective was to introduce a bill to parliament to have a “None of the above” option added to every local and general election ballot paper of the future.

The argument that Pakistan need not emulate the examples of other countries because the “context” of NOTA in the country is different is a very weak view. NOTA is about rejecting the choices your political forces gave you. There is no ambiguity or “negative” feelings behind such an option. NOTA is a fundamental right and it helps reinstate faith in the electoral process. Why should a voter vote for someone because they had to?

The ECP is not entirely to blame. The NOTA has to through the parliament and the parliament is dominated by the same political forces that oppose such reforms, vastly decreasing the options available to voters.

The belief that Pakistan is not “ready” for a re-election if 51 percent voters vote NOTA is another weak argument. Pakistan’s elections and democracy has always been about baby steps. “We have weak institutions, let them strengthen first,” is the age old argument. Perhaps it is time that a radical line be taken on the ballots. Pakistanis are set to elect recycled politicians only because these leaders are too powerful to allow otherwise. No one wants the army, indeed, but voting NOTA was a choice of the people.

The writer is a research analyst and web editor at Pakistan Today. She tweets at @aimamk