Should voters be given a NOTA (None Of The Above) choice?

Yes, I think NOTA is a great option because a democratic government is FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, and OF THE PEOPLE, so people have full right to accept or reject a government if required, they should not be bound to choose from the choices (mostly none of them is proper) provided. Result of the votes decide the future of the state, why a person will struggle in long queues if they know whoever they choose/vote no change is going to happen and that is one of the reasons why voting participation is low and which gives opportunities to false voting which is another problem which cannot be ignored.

If NOTA is introduced people will be able to show dissatisfaction for the candidate and if the majority of people's views agree, the parties will feel bound to reconsider and to avoid further re-election it will opt for better probably more deserving candidate. Regarding the financial expenses in repeated election, one thing is sure, it's going to be much less than a corrupted leader will absorb if comes in power. In future, there are chances that parties will take all the precautions while choosing its candidate for the first time to prevent the bomb of NOTA on them.

Yes, people need to understand their responsibilities while voting even more when they have a NOTA button in front of them on the voting machine and it is also hoped that parties will take it as a lesson so that a voter will never actually have to press NOTA.

I think NOTA option is not required in our election system because our voting system is such that our people have voted (including educated urban people) as per the national or state face of the political parties rather than their local candidate. So if in certain constituency a corrupt candidate stands election for the certain political party but if that political party has a good face in national level then in this situation this corrupt candidate won the election.

Some of have confusion that if a maximum number of the vote goes to NOTA then what happen?

This type of situation never occur because in Indian election voting pattern is such that in a constituency (including urban constituency) nearly 95% of peoples are vote for major political parties & rest of are vote for other smaller political parties, an independent candidate, NOTA etc.

In India NOTA is available in EVM machine from 2 years. From this 2 years, NOTA are used in assembly election of 17 different states. In each state only 1-1.5% votes are goes to NOTA. In Kerela ( the most literate state in India) only 0.5% peoples ar the vote for NOTA in 2016. In Delhi (having 98% urban population) only 0.4% people are the vote for NOTA in 2015. This data clearly show that there is no interest about NOTA option among educated urban people.

Thus, at last, I will say that in Indian election system there is no significance of NOTA.

Nowadays, we all face a real problem, to whom should we vote. Basically, we don't have any candidate who fulfils our expectation to be a genuine candidate than we have this NOTA option to show our protest to the election commission.

It's a way of complaint we can register with the election commission.

It will create data that can be used election commission to make some possible reform.

As if the candidates were not qualified to contest the election and we voted for them in favour or against or not at all, it shows that we don't have any problem with them.

And nothing will change. But on the other hand, if we use NOTA then it will create a protest against those candidates, and election commission has to do something to deal with the situation like create some threshold for contesting in an election like.

1. NO criminal background.

2. Education Qualification as Graduate.

3. Participation in Q&A session before the election, so that people can ask their questions on the Agenda proposed by him.

It will also reduce the moral of political parties which contest in the election on the basis of Money.

So in that way at the time of re-election, good candidates would not spend a lot of money on campaigning and that would reduce the corruption in future.

And educated candidates will work in the development of the concern constituencies.

In my opinion, the option NOTA does not make that much sense.

Let's take an example if there are 4 candidates and let's consider (there is a person x) who thinks all the 4 are undeserving candidates so he pressed the NOTA option.

So by pressing NOTA, it does not mean that no one will. The one with the maximum votes among 4 of them will win and thus he is wasting the vote. So rather than that he should look out of the 4 who have some deserving qualities and vote for that respective person.

1. People will take it so casually, and select NOTA as a choice for some silly reasons like, their caste people haven't got a ticket.

2. There are some lazy people, who don't take the responsibility of selecting a good leader, Instead of analyzing party plans they simply select NOTA and say "I don't have political knowledge", But being in a democratic country everyone should know about the happening of politics because your vote is not only useful for you. It shows a big difference when counted collectively.

3. Instead of providing NOTA, the ECI should do good work while confirming nominations, they should check the history of the person.

Also, it will be the best practice if ECI changes the rule to "Only certified/educated candidates are allowed to nomination process". So the dissatisfaction rate people will decrease.

Thank you.

I don't think NOTA is a viable solution at this stage of Indian development.

1. Even an ordinary election requires a huge lot of effort, time and load some of the capital to campaign, manage and run the electoral process effectively. NOTA might result in null and void results putting all the resources in vain.

2. The main AIM of NOTA is approval of best candidature. Every community wants to be represented by the best themselves. A fair part of Indian society would never be unanimous about the approval of the 'perfect' candidate. Hence, NOTA will result in unfavourable results, most of the time.

3. The outcomes of NOTA will create the governance issue. In case of cancelled elections, the problems caused in the interim will be quite debatable at times.

4. The re-election due to NOTA will not always guarantee maximum participation of the common man. They are expected to decrease with re-election for every turn.

5. Instead of implementing NOTA strategy per say, bars should be put on the candidature selection process by adopting fair practices like minimum educational qualification, clean judicial record etc. To ensure the best candidate to come up in the elections.

Implementing NOTA right now is a non-feasible solution for the betterment of Indian Politics for now. Other alternate ways need to be suggested.

Yes, and the reason behind is it is the way candidates are selected by different parties.

In, democracy, we have freedom to choose our leader and for that elections are held periodically and at the different level of governance, but the way candidates are selected by major political parties is hazardous to the spirit of the democracy. They tend to file those candidates who can influence the results with their money and muscle power. They tend to select the candidates on the basis of their caste and religion, not on the basis of their competencies.

To eradicate this we must have an option which enables our voters to challenge the candidacy of all the candidates if they are not satisfied by all of them.

But there is a glitch in the current provision of NOTA which must be eradicated so that it can serve as the major democratic check by the voter. As per now, if NOTA comes out to be the prime choice of the voters then candidate which is second to it will be declared as the winner, such provisions end up the purpose which is to be served by it. It will be much effective when the election in that constituency will be declared as void and followed by a re-election in which all the contestants who had fought earlier will not be allowed to take part again.

The NOTA choice for voters seems to be the favorable option for some of the citizens who actually understands about NOTA because if a citizen doesn't find any of the party fit to be their representatives for them than they have the particular option of NOTA to select. Besides all these negative views, apart from saying that I won't fit best, we must take this initiative to its next level by understanding that it is actually a need of our country to understand what a voter wants. I think it's an initial step for a far political vision by thinking about the voting procedure of our country and how we can raise it to the next level by adding some new useful techniques and tools like NOTA. And let the other parties understand where they are lacking. As our country support and follows the FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS which depicts a personal /individual preference also matters. Freedom of thought is there in our country then why a voter will not avail these options! Our government must aware the citizens about these changes that takes place within various intervals that how it can or can not be beneficial for them. This will help them in clearing the picture of politics as well as of politicians. And it will somehow bring transparency too.

I am writing against the motion, that NOTA shouldn't be an alternative in elections, reasons been:

1. If someone is not supporting anyone in the elections, then he/she can opt for NOTA. But who would care to stand in long queues, just to opt for NOTA. He/She could simply skip the election and won't come to vote. In this manner also, he/she is indirectly supporting NOTA. Besides this, such activity will degrade the active participation of voters in elections.

2. Cost of conducting elections is too high, moreover the inconvenience caused to voters can't be ignored. If NOTA is there then, there are chances that no candidate will emerge as a winner, and the elections will have to be conducted again. Imagine the loss in terms of money and time if this scenario is repeated more than once.

3. NOTA option may be taken as a fun option for many people. They will cast their vote to NOTA just for their entertainment. It will lead to unfair voting process.

4. Providing NOTA will not encourage people to listen to the proposals of the candidate who's going to contest the elections. The voter may have an advanced mindset to remain neutral and hence, will discourage active participation of voters in elections.

Thanks!

As per my view, NOTA is good but there should be some changes in policy.

The winning candidate at least should get 55% of vote.

The loser not eligible to nominate in next election (it's make the candidate to fear that if they do not perform well or not get good opinion of people they may get rejected and they even won't able to nominate in next election which also reduces their popularity).

The place where majority of NOTA have registered should come under the control of governor and it should monitor properly by central government to avoid override.

The budget for state should allot by central government.

Since it's a democratic country, governor rule should not be there for long period. But incase of NOTA if the majority of people not interested on none of nominated person they may choose the governor rule (they may have an election after four years).

Incase of state election if the particular district chooses NOTA it should come under the control of governor and budget fund allot (budget allotment committee should form to rule on what base the budget can allot) on bases of the development process and population to avoid of cornering by state.

Hello,

NOTA is a good option provided the voters use it for a good cause if they think the candidates are ineligible to participate in the election. Being a democratic country, the constitution provided us with a right to vote, still many educated persons are unwilling to vote. The NOTA system provides them with a vote to not to vote anyone and show their dissatisfaction towards the nominees. Though the ECI has provided NOTA as an option, their main motto is to increase the voting percentage. All the NOTA votes are considered invalid and despite the majority of the NOTA votes the highest majority candidate wins. With some changes in the NOTA system concentrating on abolishing corruption and ineligibility of the candidate. Even if there is 1% of NOTA is recorded in an election that would take lakhs of votes as invalid. There must be a limit to the NOTA votes such that exceeding this limit the ECI would propose a re-election by re-opening nominations.

I think this would make some difference in "giving NOTA choice" to the voters as it gives an opportunity in knowing the people's true opinion.

Thank you.