'Flawed' - why NOTA right now is a problem
Written on July 8th, 2022 by {"login"=>"jcbphc21", "email"=>"f20181005@hyderabad.bits-pilani.ac.in", "display_name"=>"Journal Club, BPHC", "first_name"=>"Journal Club", "last_name"=>"BPHC"}The SUC Elections 2022 are just a couple of days away, and with the soapboxes coming to an end, it's time for all of us to finally make an informed decision on whom to vote for. With the interesting choice of candidates we have for certain positions, and after witnessing their even more interesting soapboxes, many of us might be inclined to consider NOTA for said positions.
Now the question is, what happens in the case that a majority of the votes are NOTA. Are you aware that NOTA is not constitutionally defined, as in there is no mention of the existence of NOTA in our constitution? There have been two instances in the recent past, where NOTA has won a majority. The first one was the technical secretary elections of 2021, where an overwhelming 16 votes out of 23 were NOTA. Re-nominations were filed, and elections were re-conducted in this case. However, this was when the technical secretary was independently elected by the technical senate, not the GB. In the constitution, under section XV, the procedure for electing the technical secretary is clearly described, with a point mentioning that re-elections will be conducted until a candidate wins a clear majority. The second one was the SMC elections of 2019, where one candidate had the highest number of votes -611, followed by NOTA having the second-highest number of votes - 596. However, in this case, NOTA was ignored, and the next two candidates holding 3rd and 4th positions on the scale of the number of votes, 499 and 399 respectively, were elected into the SMC. Again this wasn't a case where NOTA had a clear majority.
Turns out, there is no defined procedure for when NOTA wins a majority. The Election Commission have themselves confirmed that in the case NOTA does win a majority, they hold a discussion amongst themselves to decide how to proceed further by considering all the "factors" - the decision either being to re-conduct (again, the procedure of re-conducting the election is not defined anywhere) or to just allow the candidate with the highest votes to take up the position. All in all, the EC has free reign to take whatever decision that seems right to them in the case NOTA does win a majority and has absolutely no defined guidelines binding them.
Is it fair for one student body to have so much power to be able to subjectively make a decision on whether or not the dissatisfaction of a good majority of the GB is valid enough to conduct re-election? Shouldn't NOTA be constitutionally defined with a straightforward procedure to be followed in the case NOTA does gather a majority?
However, the question is, what does the general body wish to see in the case NOTA does win the majority? After talking with a few people, we've gathered multiple contrasting opinions, some being in favor of complete re-election with re-nominations and some believing that it might not be in the best interest because if better candidates were truly interested in contesting for the election, they should have already done that in the first place.
What if the constitution were amended such that NOTA was defined and a procedure was made to be followed in the case NOTA does win a majority? We propose a possible amendment, which is only a draft and is completely open to changes. The goal is to come up with a solution that works for everybody and to avoid ambiguity in this situation.
Under Section X: General Elections of the constitution, the below-mentioned points can be added as a condition following the minimum 15% electorate rule.
- At the time of voting, the Election Commission will present the Union with the option of NOTA or 'None Of The Above' for the elections of each position of the Students' Union Council. This option will be presented alongside all the declared candidates.
- In the event that NOTA receives at least 50% of the votes of Union present and voting for a certain position, then.
- No candidate shall assume office, and a renewed election will be conducted within the next thirty days for that position only.
- During the renewed election, the EC shall reopen nominations for the posts where NOTA has received at least 50% of the votes of the Union present and voting. The previous nominations will be declared null and void.
We believe that this will be in the best interest of both the GB and the Election Commission, and we understand that re-conduction elections are a tedious and time-consuming process for the Election Commission. We've attached a google form below to get the GB's opinion on the amendment we proposed and to also account for the general consensus on what the procedure must be in the case NOTA does win a majority.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfdoI8JM8kWc7q3IBOz7WMKF-2-4HTgClM8r84tY8iiT2R2EA/viewform
DISCLAIMER: This article by no means implies that the Election Commission has ever misused its power or that they have ever taken a decision that is not in the best interest of the GB. The intent of this article is only to point out a flaw in the constitution and provide a possible solution that we believe will be in the best interest of both the General Body and the Election Commission.