Sunday, January 10, 2010

Voting Rights for NRIs - What a waste!


The Prime Minister has announced in the 8th Pravasi Bharatiya Divas that NRIs would be allowed voting rights on par with Indian citizens residing within the country. While the contribution of NRIs to the Indian economy and the improvement in the global standing of the nation ought to be recognized, and active efforts be made to protect their rights and ensure security especially in light of the recent racist attacks on Indians in countries like Australia, extending voting rights is an objectionable move on many grounds, and pertinent questions that ought to have been considered and resolved have not been adequately addressed. The NRI Voting Rights Bill was moved in 2006 in the Rajya Sabha and the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on the matter was referred to the Ministry of Law and Justice. The Government should refrain from making such vague promises before the Bill is tabled in the Parliament and is open to the public for critique and discussion. Democracy is a basic structure of the Indian Constitution and any major amendment to the Representation of People’s Act that could potentially change the fabric of elections in the country must be subject to deliberation and public debate. The following issues must be addressed before the amendment is considered.  

1. Is the proposed voting right applicable to NRIs who happen to be present in the territory of India during elections or is it applicable to all NRIs irrespective of their presence or absence in the territory of India on polling day?

The most reasonable amendment seems to be to allow NRIs to enroll in the electoral list and permit those who are present within the territory of their constituency at the time of elections to vote. But there are fundamental problems with this proposal. 

(i) In a democracy the vote and the right to vote of each and every citizen carries equal value. Universal adult suffrage entails that all adult citizens be facilitated by the State in the exercise of their franchise. To this end the Election Commission of India has been empowered by the Constitution with plenary powers for the superintendence, direction and control of elections. Democracy would remain only a tantalizing promise if citizens did not have reasonably convenient means of access to polling booths to cast their votes. In the General Elections of 2009, a polling booth was set up just so that a lone voter residing in the Gir Forest could cast his vote. This is illustrative of the fact that in the six decades of India’s experience with democracy, the right to vote has largely been taken seriously and this is something that we all must be proud of. 

Behind the secrecy of ballot, suppressed women taste freedom for a brief, ephemeral moment, the poor and oppressed classes experience dignity that they are otherwise robbed of by an often apathetic state, and we are all given a chance to rise above our prejudices, bigotry, selfish interests and act with deliberation and consideration for national interest. The vote is empowerment. The vote is our voice. And the vote is our best hope for change. The right to vote is of crucial importance and the ability of every individual to exercise their franchise must be guarded fiercely. In this context, imagine if the right to vote is extended to NRIs who can visit their constituencies during election time. I suppose when most of us think of NRIs we envision accented moneybags. But it is not the affluent successful lot alone who are within the scope of consideration. Hordes of migrant labourers who leave for foreign shores in search of a livelihood that our nation has denied them are also NRIs. They work in often inhumane conditions; lead a frugal existence just to be able to save money for those they left behind when desperation pushed them away. The government does not act adequately to protect their interests. If anyone deserves the empowerment of the vote it is them. But they would obviously not be in a position to travel to India to just cast their vote. Not that I believe those who can afford to, would take the trouble and expense of doing so. So in practice granting NRIs the right to vote conditional on physical presence may not make much of a difference to the present state of affairs. But the concept is flawed as it is inherently elitist and has a class bias. It would afford only the rich the opportunity to vote.  

If the right to vote is recognized, all NRIs must be treated equally regardless of the size of their remittance or investment capability. The red carpet that is rolled out for NRIs should be for entrepreneurs and intellectuals as well as oppressed migrant labourers to tread on. It would entail reaching out to every NRI voter and facilitating their vote. This problem is faced by migrant labour in India too. But they have the option of enrolling in the place of current residence as the voter lists are constantly updated, which NRI workers do not. Hence any proposal that has the effect of protecting the rights of the elite rich alone is abhorrent to the democratic and socialist principles on which our nation is founded and violates the equality that our Constitution cherishes.

(ii) If facilities are to be provided for NRIs to cast their vote from abroad so that every person can equally exercise their right to vote, what are the options?

a.) Voting at Indian Embassies:

This proposal does not solve the access problem. Embassies are located only in capital cities. What about those spread out in other areas of a country? Moreover what about the issue of transparency? India prides herself on free and fair elections. This is possible due to an intricate system of superintendence and monitoring by civil servants, security arrangements by the police and armed forces, independent observers from organizations for civil liberties and observers deputed by the candidate. How would the same standard of monitoring be ensured? Would not deploying personnel in every country of the world to conduct elections impose an additional burden on the public exchequer? How can such a burden on the public exchequer be justified? Elections are a massive exercise and involve an immense strain on national resources in terms of both finances and manpower. With the Indian diaspora spread over the entire world, allowing NRIs to vote would only increase the complexities and expenditure involved in the election process. In a country where even the basic needs of the countless poor have not been met, where most children do not have access to education, where people are deprived of primary healthcare, sanitation and nutrition, the idea of adding an additional burden on the material resources of the community by extending the right to vote to NRIs appears to me a cruel mockery of the very ideals that the concepts of citizenship and democracy stand for. There is no cogent argument for the right to vote by NRIs that can negate the wasteful and inadvisable character of such expenditure. Until there is freedom from want for the common man and woman living in India, any such proposal is necessarily a cause for public outrage.

(b.) Online Voting:

No system of online voting can be made completely secure from fraud and tampering. Even if such a system is devised, the results of an election must be free from aspersions regarding fairness and must be transparent. The recent EVM controversy has proved how resistant to technology we still are and has emphasized the importance of a system that convinces the voter of its immunity to doubt and challenge. Anyway, online voting is not comparable to EVMs. The EVMs have been proved as tamper proof. But no internet based system is safe from attacks by malicious elements. Any breakdown in the process would bring the entire election mechanism to a standstill, posing a legal quandary about the validity of the results. The price of this chaos would have to be paid by the people of the nation.

2. Which constituency is an NRI to register in?

The residential address stated in the passport seems to be an obvious choice. But there have been suggestions that NRIs be allowed to choose their constituency. The consequences of such a provision would be serious indeed because a group of people may collectively decide to register in a particular constituency and vote. They would then essentially be remote controlling the politics of that constituency. It is a luxury not afforded to the resident citizens of India and under no circumstances must it be allowed to anybody. 

3. How will the Model Code of Conduct be enforced?

The shenanigans of political parties during election time are the stuff that legends are made of. Towering billboards with the wide smiles of candidates, walls defaced by posters and graffiti, the endless blaring of loud speakers, election rallies and processions that could put the devout fervour of temple car festivals to shame, countless promises that last as long as words written on water do… money and muscle power combine in the spectacular circus that the elections in India is. In this cacophony the strict enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct is the only respite and an attempt to provide level playing ground for all candidates. And yet we are not rid of the scourge of money power in politics and the criminalization of politics. At this juncture who is to ensure the application of Model Code of Conduct in the campaign amongst NRIs and how is to be done? 


But above all the need of the hour is a reexamination of our understanding of citizenship. There have been proposals to make voting compulsory. It is a sad state of affairs that something as fundamental as fulfilling one’s duty towards the nation and its people by sagaciously choosing a government has to be enforced. This sense of obligation has to arise naturally and no number of laws can inculcate it. Election day is treated as a holiday by the educated, affluent urban lot, even while rural voters in Maoist infested areas defy violent calls for boycott of elections and line up to cast their vote. There is a depressing sense of apathy in our national psyche. We are apathetic to the criminal antecedents of our politicians; we turn a blind eye to their corrupt ways and moral turpitude. Those of us who have had the privilege of education do not consider it necessary to vote even though it us who have the means of making an informed choice. How many of us actually have the moral standing to talk about citizenship? Citizenship is not a bundle of rights alone, but also a set of duties. Even if a person chooses to be apolitical, she has the duty to go up to the polling booth and state it. 49 – O of the Election Rules, 1961 provide for such an option for a citizen who wishes to state that she does not consider any candidate deserving of her vote. Civil and political rights are valuable rights of a citizen. Citizenship is participation. Only those who contribute to nation building deserve a say in determining the governance of the country. Then to what extent is an NRI entitled to a say in the nation’s governance? How much of a citizen are they?  

This post is not intended to deprecate NRIs in any way. But fact remains that many Indians view an opportunity to live abroad, especially in the western world, as a great escape and achievement. Many retain their Indian citizenships only because they are yet to receive the citizenship of another country. Things are changing of course, with India’s economic and political might in the international arena increasing, everybody wants a piece of the great Indian idli, but for all its global clout it is still a country where its poor lead a miserable existence and the gap between the haves and have-nots is ever increasing. It is yet to make significant process in terms research output and development of indigenous technology in comparison to other similarly situated developing nations. In our country each one of us who have had the opportunity to avail a decent education has done so at the cost of others. We have excellent institutes of higher learning but who benefits from this education when the students of these institutes leave at the first given opportunity? These Universities have been built from the common material resources of the nation. The moment students enter an institute of repute like the IITs or NITs, IIMs, Medical Colleges and National Law Schools, it seems to me that most are suffused in a glow of a feeling of entitlement. But before we let this notion of ‘merit’ inflate our egos we must understand that it was not merit but an accident of birth that led us there. We could have just as easily been somebody who did not get adequate chances, and that all our opportunities are the cost of that somebody. 

It is easy to deplore the lack of opportunities and infrastructure in the country and blame the bureaucracy and red-tapism for slow growth. Shirking responsibilities is always easy. Which is why India produces some of the world’s finest doctors, but people die in piteous suffering for want of medical care. Our Universities educate brilliant scientists, and yet, we have to import most of our technology. Nation building is not an overnight task. Infrastructure development, wealth creation and administrative reform are endeavours that require the services of educated, enterprising and honest individuals. Lack of monetary resources is not the problem that today’s India faces. It is the lack of enough discourse, research, dissemination of knowledge, active individual and collective involvement in implementation of policies that is the bane. Governments cannot change everything for the better, citizens should and must get involved. 

To leave or not to leave a country that needs educated individuals is a personal choice. Staying behind is a choice that calls for sacrifice and a certain amount of selflessness. That decision is not subject to value judgment. But that being said, true citizenship is much more than nationality. The vote is a right that has to be earned. So, the Government can make the economic environment as conducive for investment, it must protect the rights of NRIs, and it can continue with the reservation of 15% supernumerary seats in educational institutes, but let the right to vote be earned not gifted.



4 comments:

Unknown said...

To the point and well structured, I loved read the post - not to say you've cleared all doubts I had on the issue. Good work :)

pulakesi said...

as far as voting rights to NRI's goes, the issue has two aspects namely a) the legal/procedural b) the rationale
As far as Honourable PM's statement is concerned it was made on pravasi bharatiya divas that includes both NRI's and PIO's. If one jogs the memory back a bit UPA-I had initiated a process of dual passport or citizenship for people living in select countries and the power derieved is constitutional ( read Article 11 of IC). to dissect the issue we have to see the legal issues first. For example is the right to vote legislative power of mere stamping of authority over a purely admin action( citizenship entails voting, hence vide 2005 amendment NRI can demand to vote anytime)using this line of argument the admin power is co-existent with that of EC which as rightly pointed out is wide and constitutional. My view is that if there is a clash it will be interpretation of article 11 vis-a-vis article 324 and the SC asked to spell out directly if Voting is a fundamental right or not. The rationale part has been dealt with lucidly and there remains nothing to add, other than the fact that instead of increasing the electorate one needs to make good the present. hardly 4 out of 10 vote in India, who are directly affected by formation of government, what is being done on that front

The Ambitious Violet said...

To clarify, the Indian Constitution does not permit dual citizenship. A 11 of the IC in no way empowers the State to allow for such citizenship. What has been created is Overseas Citizenship of India (OIC) which is not a citizenship per se, it is just a move to phase out the PIO card system and the OIC card just looks like the Indian passport. Also right to vote from the time of CAD has been treated as a matter of fundamental importance but is not a fundamental right.

Aditya Anand said...

@Pulakesi:
Am no lawyer here, but I do know that a SC bench has concluded that Voting is not a fundamental right rather a statutory one. It did however say that this needs to be studied in greater detail and forwarded it to the CJI.

There is a good debate on legal issues at http://lawandotherthings.blogspot.com/2009/04/voting-rights-for-indians-living-abroad.html

They include 'Taxation without representation', 'Equality' (Certain NRIs are offered the same right if they work for govt etc) and a bunch of other article.

@Ambitious Violet: Though one may think that OCI is only about circumventing the 'Dual Citizenship' clause it is arguable that it really isn't. One major distinction is that you cannot hold public office. Also I am not entirely sure but I think all PIO card holders aren't eligible for OCI.

Logistics aside, there simply isn't a good enough reason IMHO for NRI being denied a right so fundamental to the concept of the Indian state.