Gujarat's mandatory voting law reeks of totalitarianism

It also holds out the threat of punishment for those who choose not to vote

News came Monday morning that Gujarat has become the first state in the country to make voting in local body elections mandatory. 

 

The move was first initiated by Narendra Modi when he was still head of the western Indian state, but had been blocked by then governor Kamla Beniwal. They are both in different places now – Modi is prime minister of the country, while Beniwal was unceremoniously transferred to Mizoram, and then even more unceremoniously sacked a mere two months before her retirement. 

 

As per the Bill, any person who fails to vote during local body polls, is liable for "punishment and will be penalised," though it did not explain the exact nature of action. Beniwal had blocked the bill at least twice saying that compulsory voting would violate Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. 

 

So what does Article 21 say? 

 

“Protection of life and personal liberty No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.” 

 

Given this, the Gujarat government’s move flies in the face of the Indian Constitution. The government may argue that by passing a bill, it has enacted a law and thus established so-called procedure. But it has forgotten that any law that seeks to restrict personal liberty is inherently unconstitutional. 

 

India has been down this road before when prime minister Indira Gandhi struck down fundamental rights promised by the Constitution when she imposed the infamous internal Emergency in 1975. In fact, the government at one point even sought to suppress Article 21, which is inviolate even when the six fundamental rights are suspended, leading to the resignation of Justice Khanna and an overhaul of judicial appointments. 

Even now, how the Gujarat government plans to herd people to the polling booth remains murky. Mandatory voting implies a certain element of force or other disincentives. The state government has said it will impose punishment and penalties on those who do not comply, without specifying what these penalties will be. What about someone who is traveling during elections? Or worse, someone who is in hospital? It does not even address Gujaratis who are living overseas, of which there is a sizeable number. 

 

But more insidious is the Gujarat government’s encroachment upon the freedom to choose, which is the bedrock of a free society and a modern democracy. Any attempt to circumscribe this critical freedom must instantly be opposed in a court of law, and outside it. Civil liberties are much too precious to be trifled with by government, let alone a state one. 

 

In itself, making voting mandatory may seem like a great idea in a country where voter turnout is hardly exemplary. In fact, the turnout in this year’s Lok Sabha elections was 66.4%, the highest ever, but also the highest since 1984 (which can be attributed more to a wave of sympathy rather than any real enthusiasm). The average from 1952 through 2009 is just a shade under 60%, meaning that at least 40% of eligible voters decided to, or were unable to, cast their vote. 

 

But to force and herd voters into polling booths smacks of a Stalinist dispensation, not a democracy that prides itself on the freedom of individuals to choose their own government, even in the face of intimidatory tactics. Such a restriction will only be the first step into totalitarianism. 

 

In democracies across the world, especially in more advanced ones, civil liberties are the foundational basis of democracy, and a touchstone for its function. Without a high degree of such freedom, democracy would be reduced to a farce.