Broken Alliances in Maharashtra Elections

Two major alliances in Maharashtra have ultimately broken and all four major parties are going to elections on their own. The 25-year apparently strong bond between the BJP and the Shiv-Sena started developing cracks some weeks ago when both parties smelt clear victory on the basis of the results of the Parliamentary elections held hardly 5 months back. After staying away from power for 15 years it is obvious that many leaders in both parties wanted to be in the government-to-come. A few of them, particularly in BJP started seeing dreams of chief-ministership. Same was the case with the Shiv-sena with only difference that they had clear idea of who would become the Chief minister after October 15.

The 15 year old alliance of the Congress party and the NCP also fell apart. It was a more surprising incidence because almost everybody, in present situation, presumed that this alliance was not going to retain power in the state unless some miracle happened.

The points that bear significance according to my belief are:

• Political alliances are never permanent, however strong they appear to be.
• Political enmity, in the same way, is not permanent.
• Power-greed is a very strong force to break any bond between political parties.
• The alliances are only time-bound compulsions and they have only political motive.
• You cannot be sure when the like-minded parties would become two differently thinking parties.
• Everybody in politics wants to taste POWER and when it appears close anybody can betray any other politician or political party.
• If people give fractured mandate then the same political parties would start forming new yet stronger bonds stating that the alliance is in the interest of the state or nation.

We are common people and we have a constitutional sword called VOTE in our control and most of us are happy to vote and get satisfaction that I/we did something great but I think our votes have become useless in certain situations because all political parties are more or less an evil and despite the fact that most politicians are self-oriented we have to choose from them only. THE SWORD IS ACTUALLY BLUNT!

Insurance Bill - FDI in Insurance

The BJP-led NDA Government of India has introduced Insurance Bill regarding increasing the limit of FDI in Insurance Sector in the Upper House. The Congress Party has given indication of not supporting the Bill. This is not a fair practice as the previous Congress-led UPA Government had actually proposed to increase the FDI limit during their regime. According to the NDA Government, they have introduced the same format and draft of the Bill. It is unfair, therefore, on the part of the Congress Party to oppose it.

Politics must not be brought into this matter and the Congress Party and all its UPA allies must stand firm in favour of the Bill in the interest of the Nation. If they fail to do so, it would expose dual policy of the Congress Party and people of India would not forgive them.

MAY GOD GIVE WISDOM TO THE LEADERS OF THE CONGRESS PARTY!!!

ACHCHHE DIN KI BUREE BEGINNING?

Hardly a month has passed after the NDA Government has taken charge in Delhi with the much boasted promise of 'Achchhe Din' (GOOD DAYS) and the people have been prescribed with the first dose of bitter medicine in the form of 14.5% increase in Railway passenger fares and 6.5% increase in freights. The Railway minister has argued that he has increased fares and freight according to the proposed increase by previous UPA Government in their Interim budget. It appears that the Railway minister is trying to save his face by bringing UPA proposal in picture to shield himself and his government. Everybody knows that this move by the government is going to increase prices of various commodities and services. How can then people be sure that ACHCHHE DIN AAYENGE? Shri Narendra Modi must admit that it is one thing to run a state and another thing to run a country with many states. If the NDA government continues in this manner then I am sure one day people of India will start saying that Mr. Manmohan Singh was not at fault as far as price-rise was concerned.

A Welcome Gesture by Shri Narendra Modi

Let me first clarify that I am not a BJP-man nor am I a supporter of Narendra Modi.
After Mr. Modi became the Prime Minister of India, two state governments, Government of Gujarat and Government of Madhya Pradesh, announced that they would include Modi's life history as a part of academic syllabus. Narendra Modi within no time requested them not to do so and stated that it was not good to teach history of life of someone who is alive. He also emphasized that we have many great characters whose life could be more impressive on our children's character building.
This is a great gesture on his part and all political leaders should appreciate it irrespective of their political affiliation. They should also learn a lesson from it because most of our political leaders are hungry of building their reputation. Hats off to NAMO!!!

Is the Election Commission of India Biased?

During past couple of days BJP and their Prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi, in particular, have attacked The Election Commission of India by accusing that it is biased and has failed to deliver what was expected from it. Every time elections are held, one or the other political party accuses the Commission for favouring some individual or some party.
I strongly believe that the EC is not biased and is conducting polls in a fair manner. India is a hugely populated country and the mammoth job of conducting elections in this country is not that easy. There may be some stray incidences of failure of the system but on the whole, all elections are fairly unbiased.
The person like Narendra Modi should think twice before accusing the Institution which has the highest reputation in the world. All political parties should restrain themselves before entering into any controversy involving EC. The people of this country should reject such propaganda of political parties and leaders by not giving any significance to the accusations.

Use of Hazardous Pesticides Needs Rethinking

It is now a well-known fact that most pesticides used in agricultural practice have long-term concerns regarding health hazards resulting from their use. Pesticides are used in large quantities and in different forms to increase agricultural yield. All these pesticides enter air, water and soil and because they are non-biodegradable, they accumulate in large proportions within these sources. Ultimately,they enter our body through the food we eat, water we drink and air we breathe. Since they do not have any immediate effect on functioning of our body, we do not realize the hazards induced by them until major organs like kidneys and liver show disfunctioning or their some carcinogenic effect on body organs.

During the later part of the first half of the twentieth century some people realized the harmful effects  and shifted to 'Organic Food'. In simple terms 'Organic Food' is the food obtained from agricultural crops grown without using pesticides and chemical fertilizers. Gradually, the number of people supporting organic food is increasing, particularly in western world. During 1940's, a group of people in Britain started a movement in favour of organic farming targetting mainly the pesticides under the banner of 'SOIL ASSOCIATION'. Since then organisation has been working towards the promotion of organic food habits.

During their campaign against pesticides the Association published a ten-point plan for cleaning up our food:

(1) A number of the most hazardous pesticides should be withdrawn immediately.

(2) Maximum residue limits (MRLs) should be set for all pesticides used, and not just those the government thinks will not consistently show up as over the maximum.

(3) Staff and resources for testing for pesticide residues in food should be increased, especially for imported food, if the MRL system is to be effective.

(4) Fruit and vegetables sold in shops should be labelled with the pesticides used both during growth and after harvest.

(5) Penalties for causing spray drift must be increased, to reduce accidental contamination of crops, and the process of claiming damages should be accelerated.

(6) All pesticide exports should be subject to prior informed consent, whereby buyers are told about possible health risks and restrictions in the country of origin. This will help reduce the re-import of hazardous pesticides in food.

(7) A full scale epidemiological study (i.e. a health study on a large human population, taking all factors into careful account) is required into the possible impact of low levels of pesticide residues on our health.

(8) A large education campaign is required to teach consumers and farmers about how to minimize the hazards of pesticide residues.

(9) Far more research funding is needed to investigate the potential for non-chemical methods of pest and weed control.

(10) Proper government support is required for organic agriculture, particularly with respect to support over the period of conversion from chemical to organic methods, if public demand for organic food is to be met.

After initial resistance by some groups against this plan, some of the suggestions were accepted by the authorities. It is high time that people world wide press for the implementation of this type of plan for the maintenance and restoration of public health in general.

I stand against all types and forms of pesticides and insecticides and not only those used in farm practice. Pesticides used domestically to get rid of vector pests like mosquitos and cockroaches should also be completely banned.

Extinction of species and Us

 Since the beginning of life ninety five percent of different species of animals and plants have gone extinct till date during the evolutionary process, most of them during early stage when Earth experienced frequent and drastic environmental changes.

Ever since the life originated on Earth in the form of unicellular organisms, the gradual process of evolution has continued giving rise to different forms of life. As a result we have millions of species ranging from unicellular bacteria to giant and highly complex life forms like blue whale. During this natural process of evolution, species have evolved, proliferated and have become extinct. Extinction of species is a part of the natural process of evolution.

Natural extinction is not the cause of great worry as it is inevitable, but extinction due to reasons other than natural, particularly human-induced factors, are definitely a cause of worry. Once the process of environmental alterations stabilised on Earth, the rate of extinction due to natural factors slowed down drastically and most of the species could manage to survive for long after their evolution.  The rate of extinction has accelerated in recent past, particularly during previous two-three centuries, largely as a result of human activities. The speed of exploitation of natural resources necessitated by the exponentially rising human numbers is the root cause of extinction of several species. For obtaining short term benefits we are rapidly destroying the wealth of life which has taken billions of years to reach the present state.

The major causes of extinction are:

Hunting: This is an age old activity. Initially hunting was aimed at obtaining food but later it turned out to be a hobby for many. Hunting is also carried out for some commercial purpose as a part of wildlife trade described later.

Habitat Loss: Most human activities have resulted in loss of habitat for several species. Deforestation for obtaining wood (for paper and furniture) and rarely available herbal products has destroyed thick forest habitats. Development of tourism involving forests and mountains as places of interest has also forced us to destroy natural habitat by construction of roads and resorts. Moreover, some parts of the forests have been converted into residences for humans, the rising population being the main reason.

Wildlife Trade: Wildlife trade involves activities like trading of skins of wild animals, extraction of some medicinally important compounds from the bodies of some mammals and fish (codliver oil, for example), Extracts obtained from some herbal plants, organs of these animals as well as smuggling of rare species of animals to different parts of the world. Wildlife trade is highly profitable and many are involved in it. Unlike hunting transfer of an animal does not involve spot killing but the place of their captivity where they are transferred does not replicate their natural habitat and in the absence of natural environment they lose their reproductive potential or their progeny, if any, cannot survive long. Most of the smuggled animals are killed later after removing important organs from their body. Their population (in their natural habitat), in the long run, goes on diminishing and ultimately they become extinct.

Human Interference: Constructing roads and rail routes through forests and mountains for transportation create disturbance in the habitat of wild animals, reduce area for their dwelling and movement and introduce feeling of insecurity among the animals. Similarly, use of boats for fishing, steamers for transportation and cruises for leisure activities disturb marine life. Consequently, there is a gradual reduction in their numbers.

Pollution: In fact, human interference itself is the main cause of pollution. Movement of automobiles and railways through forests and mountains not only pollute these natural habitats by expelling toxic gases that harm both animals and plants but they also create noise pollution affecting the mental state of wild animals. Forest resorts attract a large number of people as tourists. They pollute the forest soil and water resources by throwing nonbiodegradable products like plastics.

Despite efforts to save species from being extinct, the process of extinction has not slowed down much. Once extinction has taken place we are helpless but there are thousands of 'Endangered' species (bound to be extinct if proper steps are not taken) which we can save. Some of them include: Javan Rhino, Mediterranean monk seal, tiger, African elephant, Mountain gorilla, Blue whale, Giant otter, Jackass penguin, Chinese alligator, Kemp's ridley turtle, etc.

WWF (World Wildlife Fund for Nature) has the main aim of protecting and conserving such species. WWF works with governments of different countries to establish reserves and parks. WWF believes that protecting animals and plants has to go hand in hand with satisfying the basic needs of people. Therefore, many of its projects are designed to maintain balance between the sustainable use of natural resources, protection of wildlife and benefits of people.

Thank Godse, You Killed Me...

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, better known as Mahatma Gandhi or Gandhi Bapu, died in 1948 after being assassinated by Nathuram Godse. Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of Nation, throughout his life preached and practised 'Ahimsa' (non-violence) and 'Satya' (Truth) and proved to the world that a battle of freedom could be fought without bloodshed.

 When India became independent in 1947, Gandhiji and other freedom fighters had dreamed of the India with 'Ramrajya' (an ideal state where all are happy and the rulers are not only honest but devoted to larger public interest to see that each citizen enjoys his/her rights with all freedom and justice). Gandhiji, unfortunately, died hardly six months after India got freedom.

After  more than six decades of independence India has definitely made progress on several fronts but the fruits of development have reached a few of upper class people and the common man of Gandhiji's dream is still far behind in being the part of that lucky lot. Corruption and greed for material wealth are so dominant that moral values have no place in Public life.

If Mahatma Gandhi was alive to see India in her present state the first major alteration he would find is that 'A' from his 'Ahimsa' (nonviolence) has crept openly to join his 'Satya' (truth) to change them to 'Himsa' (violence) and 'Asatya' (untruth). This small alteration brought about by the creeping of 'A' has created an atmosphere far from his dream of 'Ramrajya' (ideal state).

Mahatma Gandhi did not live for 125 years as he had wished. Had he lived long I am sure he would have committed suicide. If he could witness the present scenario of India...
 
...he would say to Godse: "Thank Godse, you killed me!!!"

Population - Can we reach a steady state?

The ever rising population is creating several long term social, economical as well as environmental problems. There must be an end to this situation if we want the future generations to live happily.

The population is growing at an alarming rate even in this so-called modern and well-educated world. Nobody can deny that most of the problems faced by us have their root cause in the rising population. Despite efforts by governments as well as NGOs world over the growth rate has not fallen as expexted. We need to be more specific to solve this problem by taking a more rational view of what best can be done in near future besides what is being done at present. Does a rational and still more realiastic approach exist?

The population dynamics as applied to all organisms, not just humans, indicate that the number of all organisms has a tendency of increasing upto the capacity of the environment (habitat) to support their sustenance. The balance between the reproduction rate and the rate of mortality determines the rate of their increase. The population profile of most organisms has made it clear that adults of any organism tend to replace themselves by a greater number of progeny. Thus, if factors bringing higher mortality are absent, then the potential of the increase in their numbers becomes dominant. For example, if organisms of a species can double their number in a year, there will be a thousand-fold increase in ten years. If this continues further, it leads to shortage of resources and space in a habitat and the net mortality rate shoots up establishing an equilibrium resulting in no further increase in numbers.

Advanced medical facilities, increase in food production and better understanding of hygiene has resulted in lower death-rate for humans in recent times. Because of this the human population is increasing quite rapidly. The human population, however, has not reached the equilibrium stage and the numbers are increasing despite several efforts on the front of controlling population. This does not mean that the human population is not subject to regulatory factors similar to those that control the population of other organisms. We cannot afford, however, to wait for the equilibrium to establish naturally. We have reached a stage where it has become need of the time to control population growth as early as possible so that the equilibrium is reached far in advance.

 This is possible, too, if we limit the size of families. Ideally, each pair of parents must be prepared to reproduce not more than two children. If this self-imposed practice continues globally, human population will automatically reach the much awaited equilibrium at an early stage. Efforts have been made in the past to promote this concept, particularly in India during 1970s and 1980s by spreading the message through a slogan ‘WE TWO, OUR TWO’ as a part of the Family Planning Programme. It failed, much due to reasons like low literacy level among rural and tribal people, ignorance, superstition, and above all, the lack of political will. However, the time has changed a lot now and if properly executed this concept is bound to bring about good results. If it is not followed voluntarily, it has to be made mandatory by enforcement of law and declaration of special benefits to the citizens having not more than two children. A strong political will and rational thinking on the part of people are must  to make ‘WE TWO, OUR TWO’ a magically successful concept.

Man - A social animal?

The fact is that we put all our efforts to understand the natural laws but we refuse to follow them just for small and short-period benefits, both on individual level and collectively as a species.

Man (human being) is a social animal. This sentence is taught in schools to describe the nature of man. It was originally quoted way back in seventeenth century by Baruch Spinoza. In what sense are we social ? Is it because we live in family, interact with one another, rear and educate our children, make friends, etc.,etc.?  To some extent we are social on personal level but as a species we have never shown SOCIAL BEHAVIOR…we kill other animals…we destroy environment…we do great harm to mother nature for short-term gains…we fight among ourselves…in family…in streets…on borders…and then we call ourselves SOCIAL ANIMAL!

Robert Ardrey has clearly stated the human nature in : ‘The tragedy and the magnificence of Homo Sapiens (human beings) together rise from the same smokey truth that we alone among the animal species refuse to acknowledge natural law’. The fact is that we put all our efforts to understand the natural laws but we refuse to follow them just for small and short-period benefits, both on individual level and collectively as a species. The moment we started understanding nature we developed a misconception that nature can be controlled and so began disrupting natural balance for selfish gains. Man has been trying hard to alter nature in all its aspects and is turning blind eye to the devastating consequences of his misbehaviour.

 Ian Mchang rightly quoted: ‘Man is a blind, witless, low-brow, anthropocentric clod who inflicts lesion upon the earth.’

The civilization of machines, for whose creation man is very proud, has converted him into a machine and has forgotten his very essence of humanity. The manner in which modern man is behaving clearly indicates that MAN IS THE MOST ANTI-SOCIAL ANIMAL on this planet earth.

Election Reforms for India - My view

Elections in India, as an essential part of democratic process, have some unjustifiable aspects. I want the process to be rectified and modified in the interest of people of India.

Suggestion #1

We more than often see during general elections that a person fights election from more than one constituency. Constitutionally one can do so but the practice appears unjustifiable. Generally, big names of political parties prefer this option when they smell defeat from a constituency. I believe that…

A CANDIDATE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO CONTEST FROM THE CONSTITUENCY WHERE HIS/HER NAME HAS BEEN REGISTERED AS VOTER
If a candidate wins from, say, two constituencies, he/she has to vacate one of them in a very short period because constitutionally a person cannot represent two constituencies simultaneously in Local Municipal corporation, State Assembly, and the Parliament. We have by-election in the constituency vacated by such elected person. This lays additional burden on the Election Commission as well as the people of that constituency. The money spent on election process comes from the tax paid by the citizens of India. Thus, there is additional burden on the tax-payer as the amount spent on such useless procedures is non-productive.
I cannot understand why such useless, expensive and unjustifiable(from all angles) options have been generated. All political parties should come forward to endorse the concept that

 

 ‘ONE PERSON CAN CONTEST FROM ONLY ONE CONSTITUENCY AT A TIME’ in the interest of the nation and its democracy.

  Suggestion #2

We witness, rather helplessly, scores of independent candidates during each election. If one studies the statistics of all elections, I am sure, one would find that most of the independent candidates lose the election. Rarely an independent candidate can collect victorious support on his own. Majority of them not only lose the election but they also lose their deposit money.

Indian constitution gives the right to contest election to all eligible citizens without being attached to any political party. There is nothing wrong in it, but this right is misused by some individuals as well as some political parties. Since the requirements to file the nomination paper are not stringent and the deposit amount is nominal (affordable) some people use election as a means to become publicly known. Some individuals use their candidature as a means to bargain with the party candidates. This happens when the candidature of a person as an independent poses a potential threat to a party candidate by eroding a fraction of the party’s support base. The party candidate, in such circumstances, has to enter a bargain (by paying handsome amount of money to the candidate) as a result of which the independent candidate declares his support to the party candidate publicly and makes requests to vote for that candidate.

Often the political parties themselves bring such independent candidates to fight the election with a view to reducing the vote share of the candidate from the opposite party. The so called independent candidate is in reality a party-man supported from behind the curtain by the party so that he stays in the fray till end and helps the party candidate by obtaining votes from the share of the opposite party’s candidate.

All above aspects are political but I am more concerned with the problems such independent candidates give rise to. For the Election Commission, a large number of candidates makes the situation more difficult to handle. Besides administrative problems the Commission has additional burden on its electoral expenses. I remember an example in which more than 300 candidates had filed nomination in an assembly constituency in Karnataka. The ballet paper was actually a booklet which not only created problems for the Election Commission but also to the voters.
In the interest of democracy and the nation, I suggest that :

A CANDIDATE, IRRESPECTIVE OF HIS/HER PARTY AFFILIATION, SHOULD BE BARRED FROM FIGHTING ANY ELECTION FOR NEXT SIX YEARS IF HE/SHE LOSES HIS/HER DEPOSIT IN AN ELECTION.

Suggestion #3

Every citizen of India has the right to contest elections for Municipal Councils, State assemblies and the Parliament if he/she can fulfill legal requirements for that. At times we find persons without proper education entering the election fray only because they have backing of a particular political party. Such persons, if elected, can do little during their tenure as far as policy matters are concerned. Their only job is to raise their finger in favour of or against some point being debated in the house because they are told to do so by the party leader. They do not have even superficial knowledge of the issue being debated. Such members often do not even have proper knowledge of the geography, demography and history of the constituency they represent. This is not in the interest of the people of this country as far as progress and policy-making are concerned.
I firmly believe that :

THERE MUST BE SOME MINIMUM EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION MANDATORY FOR A PERSON TO BECOME ELIGIBLE FOR CONTESTING AN ELECTION
so that the democracy of this country is strengthened.

However, the million-dollar question is : WILL ALL POLITICAL PARTIES BE WISE ENOUGH TO REACH A CONSENSUS AS REGARDS MINIMUM EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION?

Suggestion #4

Every election witnesses partial voting; sometimes well below 50% voters exercising their right. During the heat of elections we all debate the question of poor voter turnout and scores of suggestions are put forward from all corners of India aiming at increasing poll percentage. Once the elections are over, we forget poor voting till next election as if it were a non-issue.

One most widely uttered suggestion is “Compulsory Voting”. Can voting be made mandatory ? Can people be forced to vote irrespective of their desire to do so ? What are the limitations of “mandatory voting”? Before we think about voting being made compulsory let us first think what the reasons for poor voter turnout can be. A person may not vote because he/she…

• …is physically unfit.
• …is not in his/her constituency on the day of election.
• …is socially engaged.
• …does not find, from the list of candidates, a proper person to vote for.
• …feels that his/her vote is not going to make much difference as the constituency has been largely dominated by a person/ a political party for last several elections.
• …feels that all political parties/candidates have one common minimum programme which excludes common man’s interest once they get elected/ get power.
• …is tired of voting frequently.

Some of the above are circumstantial limitations for which a person cannot be blamed if he/she does not exercise the right to vote.

I think the concept of “Compulsory Voting” is not justifiable as one may not be in a position to vote due to the reasons which are genuine and out of his/her control. There may be some alternative approach by which a strong opinion in favour of maximum possible voting be created nation-wide. All political parties and the Election Commission along with some NGOs should take an initiative right from now in this direction to work out a people-friendly policy which encourages people to vote in a positive manner rather than the so-called “Compulsory Voting”.

Next time when You go to a zoo...

Oxford Dictionary describes a ‘zoo’ as a place where living wild animals are kept for the public to see them and where they can be studied and bred.

Most zoo authorities claim that they work to save rare species and, through captive breeding, replenish populations in the wild. A zoo’s main role is of saving the planet’s wildlife.

There are thousands of zoos on this planet. In the beginning the idea of saving endangered species could have given birth to the concept of establishing zoos but modern zoos, despite their big claims, have primarily turned more into a business activity and a place of entertainment. The commercialisation of zoos has far outweighed their importance as a place for protection of endangered species.

 Time and again people have raised their voice against the pattern of functioning of modern zoos. There are several study reports revealing that less than one percent of zoo’s animals are endangered. This clearly shows that most of the animals (birds included) kept in cages are for entertainment only and not for conservation.


There are certain laws and directives regarding conditions to be maintained in the zoos. The laws may differ from region to region but the central idea, that these caged animals must be provided with conditions matching to their natural habitat as far as possible, remains the same. Recent studies show that most zoo authorities fail in maintaining hygienic conditions and supplying enough food to animals in the zoo. Next time when you go to a zoo, think how many of these caged animals are endangered and, therefore, fit for being caged. How many of the people visiting the zoo have in mind the idea of getting knowledge about wildlife and how many of them have come just for entertainment? In this era of technology we have other better means of getting knowledge of wildlife and studying them in a more scientific manner than keeping animals in zoo.

Next time when you go to a zoo, while standing outside the cage of an innocent animal (for me all animals are innocent) try to see in the eyes of that caged animal. You will witness that though it is regularly getting its food and though the conditions are very good, it constantly tries to find a way out. Replace yourself with that animal, of course in imagination, and think: Would I be happy to be there with all luxuries guaranteed till my death? The answer is a big ‘NO’ because the greatest luxury of life is ‘FREEDOM’ even if it may threaten your survival at certain occasions.

During my visit to a zoo, some days back, I was standing in front of a cage. The animal (a deer) on the other side was persistently trying to find a way out. Then it stood facing me, silent pain rolling down the eyes, staring at me with an unspoken hope and helplessness. I felt that it was asking me: “What is my crime? Why don’t you let me live my life with freedom?”  It stared in my eyes for a few moments and then turned its face from me realising, perhaps, the greater degrre of my helplessness. My eyes became wet.

 I decided…
Next time when I go to a zoo…
No, no I will never go to a zoo. There will be no next time…!

Right to Reject

Anna Hazare and his team,had come out with the concept of ‘Right to Reject’ as a part of their movement to reform the existing election system and electoral process for all levels starting from the Gram Panchayat to the Parliament. They had demanded that the list of candidates for any election must have ‘None of These’ as an additional option so that a voter, if not happy with all the candidates in fray, may choose that option. If the votes polled in favour of ‘None of These’ are in majority, then none of the candidates would win and there would be re-election in that constituency with a fresh list of candidates, containing none of the previously rejected lot.

 The demand, as it had been put forward and recently approved by the Supreme Court of India directing the Election Commission to do necessary changes, may appear an attractive proposition but there are certain aspects which must be considered judiciously.

 (1) What do we actually want to attain by ‘Right to Reject’? What if the voters of some constituency reject another lot of candidates too, when re-election takes place? Shall we go for yet another re-election? We must not forget that frequent elections add to the financial burden and it is voters who ultimately bear this burden.

 (2) If we analyze the results of previous elections (all elections that took place after Independence) we find many examples in which, for one or the other reason, an honest and suitable candidate loses election and some notorious antisocial element gets elected as an MLA or an MP.

 (3) A person, as a voter, casts his / her vote in favour of a candidate under the influence of several factors. It is a pitiable situation that even after more than six decades of Independence and a lot more socio-economical development along with education spreading to once inpenetrable tribal and poverty-bound pockets, a majority of us vote based on caste, creed, religion, provincialism and nepotism.

 (4) During elections, generally, we observe very low voter turnout for which there may be several reasons. But the major reasons are: (i) Indifference on the part of a large proportion of voters towards the election and (ii) pessimistic view of some voters who assume that their vote is not going to make much difference and their candidate is bound to lose.

 (5) Some voters keep away from voting assuming that whosoever gets elected, will ultimately practise one or other form of corruption and use the power delegated to him / her to increase personal wealth without worrying much about the common man’s problems. Not voting for this reason is as good as ‘None of These’.

 My personal view, therefore, is that instead of going for the option of ‘Right to Reject’, we should carry out a nation-wide movement of political awakening which persuades voters to vote by their conscience without being influenced by the trivial factors like caste, creed, religion, etc. The political parties must exhibit wisdom by fielding only candidates with good social background, history of service to mankind, clear image and versatility in administrative processes. To me, ‘Right to Reject’ appears to be somewhat absurd proposition.