SC questions Centre on right to not vote

Additional Solicitor General Amarendra Sharan,appearing for the Government,opposed the petition filed in 2004,saying,Theres no positive right to not to vote. He stuck to his stand that the suggestion of having a negative or none of the above vote is not practical at all.

Under existing provisions of Sections 49O and 128 of the Representation of People Act,a voter who after coming to a polling booth does not want to cast his vote has to inform the presiding officer of his intention to not to vote. The presiding officer would then make an entry in the relevant rule book after taking the signature of the voter.

According to the PUCL,Section 49O was violative of the Constitutional provisions guaranteed under Article 19 1a Freedom of Speech and Expression and Article 21 Right to Liberty and violated the secret ballot concept.

While the Government was opposed to the plea,the Election Commission appeared open to the idea of having a specific provision,in which a voter has the option of rejecting the candidate. The ECs counsel,Meenakshi Arora,who will present the poll panels view on Thursday,said this in a query from the Bench.

Opposing the PIL,the Government counsel said the plea to have a none of the above provision in EVMs was impractical as it was not only negative but also went against the basic idea that maximum effort and money of every candidate must be to get the voters to the polling booth to vote for him.