INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES

GHAZIABAD

A PROJECT REPORT ON

“INDIAN DEMOCRECY” SHOULD VOTING BE

MADE COMPULSORY ………?

Submitted to - Submitted by -
Prof. Sonia Singh Arti Sharma (010254)
(Faculty of IMS Ghaziabad) Veena Punjabi (010290)
Avishek Kr. Singh (010256)
Abhishek Gulat (010246)
Atul Shukla (010255)
 ABSTRACT
"Voting is a given right that any citizen of a true
democracy has the privilege to possess. The sad fact is
that we are one of the worst nations in the "free world"
to actually express this right. There are several other
countries that vote in much higher numbers than us,
most of which have had a democracy for a shorter
period of time . Our voting numbers indicate that we not
only need to vote in higher percentages, but we also
need to care more about the people that are running
this great country and expressing our love for our own
democracy through the simple process of registering to
vote and following up by actually voting. After all, if we
cannot show this world we love our form of government,
how can others follow us.As you can see, voting is a
very important part of being a democracy. It is a very
simple task to do and affect not only your life, but also
the lives of everyone in this country. If we had elected
the best officials to govern us, then the recent
deterioration of our trust in the government should have
never happened. Voting takes only a few minutes, and
can even be done if you are not in town on the date of
the election. We must continue to ask questions and to
voice our opinion in the best way we can, and that way
is to vote."
In this report we would concentrate on the importance
of voting in the present time , keeping in view the
significance of democracy for the common man .Certain
arguments in favour of and against making voting
compulsory is dealt with . In this report we have also
tried to give some views on why and how can voting be
made compulsory.
 INDIAN DEMOCRACY
Should Voting be made
compulsory……..?
Introduction:

Reading any fragment of the Constituent Assembly of India debates,

whether on secularism, federalism, minority rights or the structure of
the judiciary, one is struck by the ubiquitous presence of the idea of
democracy. In the debates, alternative proposals, say on secularism or
federalism, were always justified by the argument that this particular
proposal would be better at furthering democracy. With the experience
of colonization behind them, the members naturally endeavored to
frame a democratic constitution, where the people could be said to be
self-governed, rather than being merely subject to an alien government.
Only a fifty odd years have passed since the time of those debates, but
some of the ideals of that world seem to be already near death. Living
as we do in the time of George W. Bush, the dream of democracy now
is always accompanied with a bitter aftertaste. Just as the costs of
development, for so long justified as merely the control of nature, now
seem unbearable, similarly many have begun to question the possibility
of a democracy with any claim to universality. Is democracy only
possible, when, never mind the rhetoric, it is democracy really only for
a few, that is, that democracy for a few is made possible by the
exclusion of the many others from democracy. Are we to see
democracy as merely a legitimating device, to keep the subjects quiet
by giving them the illusion of participating in their own governance?
Surely not only in America, but in many a democracy, “its political
rituals preclude any real possibility of the emergence of dissent and are
designed to reinforce conformity and consensus.” How does the
institutional design that was put in place in India half a century ago
measure up to its own democratic principle of one person, one value? 2
Did the constitution makers see democracy as a continuum
between the ideas of one person, one vote and one person, one value,
or did they, like Ambedkar, accept that the principle of one person, one
vote, was only a faint approximation of the real democratic principle of
one person, one value.
In this paper, we propose to look at some of the institutional features of
Indian democracy. If we look at some of the main components of the
frame of Indian democracy, as envisaged by the constitution makers, -
such as citizenship rights, federalism, an independent judiciary, - we
can see these as being put in place as separate checks on the powers of
the legislature and the executive, specially those of the central
government. Framed as the debates on the Constitution were,
constantly in the background of a conversation about a majority and
several minorities, it was quite clear that democracy did not merely
mean the government of the majority, but also that, whichever
government it were, it was to be a limited and accountable
government. After all, when we say, one person, one value, that applies
first of all to the equality between those in government and those
governed.
Let the record show, the critics of Indian democracy claim, that it has
failed this benchmark of accountability. The government at the center,
of whichever party it has been, has been able to get away with the most
extreme of violations of the rights of religious minorities, whether
Sikh, Christian, or Muslim. Judges at different levels of the Indian
judiciary have been superceded at will, and the federal structure has
been bent, often enough, at the behest of the central government, again
of whichever party. In so far as the bureaucracy is concerned, stories of
extreme corruption, as exemplified by the case, for example, of
Akhand Pratap Singh, are legion. Failing to check the government
through the different mechanisms as mentioned above, several groups
have raised the demand for better representation in the government
itself as a more adequate way of defending their interests. This issue
was very much alive during the Constituent Assembly debates as well,
and it was not just Ambedkar who spoke of guaranteed representation
for different groups in the elected legislatures, the cabinets at different
levels, and the bureaucracy. The demand today, by women, by
Muslims, and by the ‘backward classes’ can be seen in this light – at
least one of the motivations behind it has been the failure of the
institutions designed by the framers to keep the government in check
and accountable. Instead of strengthening the mechanisms of
accountability, should Indian democracy go along the road of
representation or are the two processes interlinked? Before we answer
this question, let us look at some of the features of the institutional
design in more detail.
 VOTING
If you are new to the issue of voting system reform, you may be
wondering what exactly voting systems are and why they are so
important. The first question is the easiest to answer. A voting system
is the set of procedures that determine how people are elected to office.
These procedures include how the ballot is structured, how people cast
their votes, how those votes are counted, and how the winners are
decided. Or as political scientists often put it: voting systems are the
means by which votes are translated into seats in the legislature.
(Political scientists also often refer to voting systems as "electoral
systems" a term you will see in various articles on this site. But I think
"voting system" is a simpler and clearer term, and I will use it most of
the time in my writings on this subject.
As an illustration, let’s do a quick overview of two of the most
common voting systems in Western democracies. The most prevalent
system for legislative elections in the United States is the winner-take-
all system--or in more formal parlance, the "single-member district
plurality system." That rather technical phrase captures the two basic
attributes of this system. First, votes are cast in single-member
districts--districts in which only one member of the legislature is
elected. All the candidates are on the ballot and we cast a vote for only
one of them. Second, the winner is determined by who receives the
most votes--the plurality of the vote. This voting system has become so
familiar to people in the United States that we hardly ever stop to think
about it. You may even assume that this is just how democratic
elections work.

Why Are Voting Systems Important?

Voting is necessary right that has been acknowledged to all citizens
since it appropriates the society to become as closer as it could to a
perfect democracy - a nation ruled by its citizenry. Voting is the most
essential right of all according to some of the peoples.
In any kind of election voting is from native elections to Presidential
elections, renders a significant way to voice your thoughts concerning
elected leaders and overall general policies; voting also aids you decide
your very own future by opting a person who might speculate your
own aspects.
The percentage of people who turn out to vote varies from country to
country. Citizens of some country utilize this right completely and
their votes can cause changes even in the constitution.
While at many other countries many people don't actually vote at all,
this may be due to illiteracy or lack of willingness. But people who are
educated and still don't vote should actually behave
more responsibly and cast their vote.

SHOULD VOTING BE MADE

COMPULSORY….?

Arguments in favour of voting

Such a system guarantees that the government represents a majority of
the population, not only individuals who vote. This helps ensure that
governments do not neglect sections of society that are less active
politically, and victorious political leaders of compulsory systems may
potentially claim greater political legitimacy than those of non-
compulsory systems with lower voter turnout.
In a similar way that the secret ballot is designed to prevent
interference with the votes actually cast, compulsory voting prevents
interference with access to the vote. Compelling voters to the polls for
an election mitigates the impact that external factors may have on an
individual's capacity to vote such as the weather, transport, or
restrictive employers. It is a measure to prevent disenfranchisement of
the socially disadvantaged. Polls are generally held on a Saturday or
Sunday as evidenced in nations such as Australia, to ensure that
working people can fulfill their duty to cast their vote. Similarly,
mobile voting booths may also be taken to old age homes and hospitals
to cater for immobilized citizens, and postal voting may be provided
for people who are away from their electorate on election day.
If voters do not want to support any given choice, they may cast spoilt
votes or blank votes. According to compulsory voting supporters, this
is preferred to not voting at all because it ensures there is no possibility
that the person has been intimidated or prevented from voting should
they wish. In certain jurisdictions, voters also have the option to vote
none of the above if they do not support any of the candidates to
indicate clear dissatisfaction with the candidate list rather than simple
apathy at the whole process.
Compulsory voting will potentially encourage voters to research the
candidates' political positions more thoroughly. This may force
candidates to be more open and transparent about their positions on
many complex and controversial issues.
Another benefit of compulsory voting is that it makes it more difficult
for special interest groups to vote themselves into power. Under a non-
compulsory voting system, if fewer people vote then it is easier for
smaller sectional interests and lobby groups to control the outcome of
the political process. The outcome of the election reflects less the will
of the people (Who do I want to lead the country?) but instead reflects
who was logistically more organized and more able to convince people
to take time out of their day to cast a vote (Do I even want to vote
today?).
Political scientist Arend Lijphart writes that compulsory voting has
been found to increase voting by 7-16% in national elections, and by
even more in secondary (such as local and provincial elections and
elections to the European Parliament).. He argues that other civic
duties also exist, like paying taxes, attending school and, in some
democracies, military conscription and jury duty. All of these
obligatory actives require far more time and effort than voting does,
thus compulsory voting can be seen as constituting a much smaller
intrusion of freedom than any of the other activities.
Apart from the increased turnout as a value in itself, Lijphart lists other
advantages to compulsory voting: firstly, the increase in voting
participation may stimulate stronger participation and interest in other
political activities; secondly, as no large campaign funds are needed to
goad votes to the polls, the role of money in politics will decrease;
thirdly, compulsory voting acts as a sort of civil education and political
stimulation, which creates a better informed population; fourthly, high
levels of participation decreases the risk of political instability created
by crises or dangerous but charismatic leaders.

Voting - a right and a

responsibility
Voting is a right and a responsibility. However, it is your right to vote.
We are giving up the power and letting other people make our decision
by not casting our votes. It's high time we take our right to vote
seriously.
WITH COMING elections in every state of India, I was enthusiastic
towards casting my vote. But many people need to be aware of the
significance of voting and their rights. Many questions are raised in my
mind when I came across the people who does not know what a voter
ID is? They don’t have VOTER ID cards.

We call ourselves citizens of the country, but are we really the citizens
of the country? Whether it is US or India, if we are citizens of a
particular country then why are we not enjoying our rights and
discharging our duties. India is a free country and a democracy. Then
why and what is holding us back from enjoying our rights and
fulfilling our duties? Is it lack of knowledge or lack of thought towards
our country? Have we become selfish and think only for ourselves and
for our country?

We need to understand that we are the citizens of a country and have a

few rights and duties towards it. Voting is one such right. We have to
vote in elections and participate actively. As elections are taking place
in most of the states in India, we should make our Voter ID cards.

But first, what is voting? This question should be vivid in the young
minds as they are future citizens. We have all studied about this in
schools but haven’t learned anything is all I can say. We just mugged
up and vomited all we mugged up in the exams. That is why today
many youngsters who are between 18-25 years of age does not have
voter IDs. Election means a holiday for most of us. It is not so. Voting
is not only our right it is our duty and also responsibility of all of us as
citizens of the country.

Voting commonly implies election, ie a way for an electorate to select

among candidates for office. I can say it is the method by which the
electorate of a democracy appoints representatives in its government.

What is a vote? A vote is an individual act of voting, by which a voter

expresses support for a certain candidate or a certain selection of
candidates or a political party.

Election is just days away, I think voters should get serious and
educate themselves on the candidates. Just don’t vote for the sake of
voting. Think and vote. Don’t be narrowing minded. It is always good
to use our God-given brain.

We are in a very serious situation because of a corrupt government

based on deceit, greed, personal interests and political games. Now
with the terror attack in Mumbai and failure of security in the country,
it is our duty to vote for the right candidate. In India, IT jobs have been
severely affected. And all of this has trickled down to hardships and
financial destruction for many people. So take the right and mindful
decision.

Remember elections are more than a process of voting someone to rule

the nation. Elections have been a significant aspect of Independent
India. It is more like a change of power, and ensuring the importance
of the individual in a democracy, the voter.

It is a right and a responsibility. However, it is your right to vote. We

are giving up the power and letting other people make our decision by
not casting our vote. We need to keep our eyes open and make the
decision ourselves.

Many educated people think that voting is sheer waste of time as all
the politicians are the same. They make great promises before the
election and when they are selected they forget everything.... But if we
discharge our duties, change can happen. Get your voter ID and
participate. Now we have the facility to get the forms at any post office
and submit. The voter IDs will be received by the electors at their
doorstep.

Let’s all become one and united for the upcoming elections to vote the
right person in every state to make our country a safe and better place
on earth.

SHOULD VOTING BE MADE

COMPULSORY?
PROF. K. NAGESHWAR
The Gujarat government’s decision to make voting compulsory in
the local bodies’ elections triggered off a debate on the impact of
compulsory voting on the Indian democracy. The large scale
indifference of voters especially the affluent and the middle class,
metropolitan voters to exercise their franchise created an out cry
among the democratic sections of the society. The low voter
turnout and the fractured mandate in a fragmented polity is making
a mockery of the representative character of Indian democracy.
Emerging anguish out of this state of affairs is giving scope for an
approval to such measures like compulsory voting even among the
right thinking sections of the society. To begin with such policy
changes having larger ramifications to society in general and
democratic polity in particular should have taken after a larger
public debate and greater political consensus. At least Gujarat
government headed by Narendra Modi is certainly not a good
choice for introducing reforms to strengthen democratic values.

The debate over compulsory voting is not being heard for the first
time now. Even the apex court has expressed its opinion on this.
The major political parties like the ruling congress and the Left
parties objected to this move of the BJP government headed by
Modi. The Supreme court has earlier dismissed a law suit that
wanted to make voting by all eligible voters compulsory in
elections for various legislative bodies. A bench comprising of
Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan and Justice P Sathasivam
dismissed the suit as early as in April 2009 on some other
occasion. But, Supreme Court observations made at that time are
relevant today in the wake of Gujarat government’s decision. This
is the first ever such attempt in our country.

The Supreme Court observed that people can not be taken to

polling booths by enacting laws. The court observed if people in
Kerala and other states were coming out in large numbers to
exercise their franchise, it was because of their awareness, not
due to any legal provisions. The Supreme court bench referred to
the fact that India was recording up to 60 percent voting in various
elections and that was satisfactory.

The law suite demanding a law to make voting compulsory by

eligible voters had been filed by Atul Sarode from Savda district of
Maharashtra.

Given these observations expressed by the apex court, the Gujarat

government’s decision has to undergo the judicial scrutiny.

Infact the National election studies by Centre for Developing

Studies (CSDS) reveal that there has been a steady rise in the
percentage voting in Indian elections since independence. The
voting in India is even better than that of United States. This is not
to justify the voter apathy but to question the cynicism over Indian
democratic experience. Yet an another trend prominently noticed
in India is that the voting tally in state Assembly elections is usually
higher than that of Parliament elections. In comparison, voting in
the election bodies in the elections to local bodies is generally
higher .What does this indicate. The voters tend to vote more as
the proximity between the political system and the people
increase. Low voting turn out is certainly a cause of concern. But,
we can not look for undemocratic solutions to problems in
democracy. Let us also recall the experience of Internal
Emergency of 1975. There was a sense of fear in the society.
Offices functioned punctually. Family Planning targets were met.
The colleges and Schools functioned normally. Can we welcome
emergency? People cynical of democratic deficit often suggest that
India will prosper if there is a military dictatorship. But, the
experiences of military dictatorships like Pakistan are before us.

Infact, what is required immediately is compulsory education,

compulsory provision of health, shelter, food, drinking water,
sanitation. There should be an act making compulsory for the
members of legislature and parliament to attend the sessions.

Is voting an end or a means in democracy? People voting to install

a good government is the end. Voting is only a means to
accomplish this end. What is the use making the means
compulsory when one does not have a control on the end. We can
bring the voter to the polling by coercion. But, can we make him or
her to vote for a good candidate by coercion. Force can not instill a
good and responsible voting behaviour. Compulsory voting in the
absence of awareness and consciousness may lead to reckless
and irresponsible voting behaviour. This would harm the Indian
democracy more. The cure can not be worse than the disease.

The Article 19 (1) (a) of the constitution guarantees every citizen

freedom of expression. voting is also an expression of this
freedom. Freedom to not to express opinion is inherent in the right
to express. The founding fathers of Indian constitution deliberately
differentiated between the fundamental rights and fundamental
duties. Any attempt to blur this may lead to abrogation of
fundamental rights. Once we accept the concept of force what ever
may be the reason, it will encourage the cult of coercion which will
be detrimental to democracy. Regimentation is not a solution to
correcting distortions in peoples behaviour.

Infact, one can accept the concept of compulsory voting at least for
the sake of an argument only if all the other democratic
alternatives were exhausted. Many steps can be taken to improve
the voting. The first step should be cleaning up the polity. The
prevailing political culture is not inspiring enough for the people to
come forward to vote. The criminalization of politics, bad
governance are creating a sort of cynicism among the voters. The
average voter is not in a position to feel that his or her life will
change by exercising franchise. Bridging this great democratic
disconnect is urgently needed to enthuse voters.

The voter lists are faulty .There are always complaints of missing
voters. Perfect voter list is not an impossible task. Many voters do
not come out to vote as they do not have information of the polling
booth in which they have to cast their vote. The political parties
normally distribute voter slips. But, every party does this in their
strongholds. But, the election commission can itself send such
information to all the eligible voters by post. It does not cost much.
On the spot registration of voters should be permitted subject to
submission of proper documentation. Mobile voting, Online voting,
Any where voting should be introduced. Transport facility can be
provided by election authorities on the day of elections to facilitate
voters.

Increased voter awareness, greater politicisation of masses,

improved literacy etc., can go a long way in improving the voting.
The idea of compulsory voting may gain some credence only after
attempting all and many such measures to encourage voters to
vote.

There are several problems in implementing the compulsory

voting. How to implement the penalties for non compliance with the
law? An army of bureaucracy is required to do so. There is a
possibility of poor and the weak facing official harassment .For
instance more than ten lakhs people migrate to far off places in
search of work from Mahaboobnagar district alone. How to ensure
these migrant labourers comply with the law.

Any hasty move without a proper debate and closer scrutiny is

fraught with dangerous consequences for the Indian democracy
and society.

“ The ballot is stronger than bullets.”

Since Mumbai terror attack “common man" blazed criticism
against politicians. Public anger against politicians was reflected
through various channels, newspapers, blogs etc. The reaction
to 26/11 was bunch of mixed reactions… anger towards system,
politicians; sorrow for the fallen heroes who lost their lives
because State could not provide them with better weapons for
self protection; sympathy towards families who lost their loved
ones. On the one hand people lighted candles to show solidarity
for brave fighters who sacrificed their lives to save Mumbai, & on
the other hand politicians were being criticized for dragging India
in such a situation due to ineffectiveness. In many ways people
shown that they have no faith in politicians and strongly
protested against political apathy. The shock and anger on
26/11 was witnessed in many forwarded e-mails, blogs, and
articles. The debate started whether “Right Not To Vote" exits
under section 49-O of THE CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS
RULES, 1961? Many columns suggested that people can go to
polling booths, confirm their identity, get their finger marked and
convey to the presiding election officer that they would prefer not
to vote. Many supported that no such right exits because
Government has not yet given approval to such law.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST
VOTING….
The argument against voting seems like it should follow logically from
the argument against democracy. After all, if an institution is
illegitimate, then we shouldn’t support or endorse it, and voting is
obviously a tacit endorsement of the democratic process.
This is probably why there is so much propaganda that suggests all
voting, of any kind, is a glorious civic act. Slogans like “Get out the
vote” and “Vote or die” make it a point not to advocate for any specific
candidates or positions. Nothing strikes us as more illogical that urging
people to just vote, without regard to who or what they might vote for.
We don’t agree with voting for any reason, but we can at least respect
the desire to win—But why is voting a good thing in and of itself?
Even if you believe in democracy, voting is clearly an instrumental
activity—you do it to achieve an end, not as something that should be
enjoyed for its own sake.
The only reason to hype voting for its own sake is because voting is in
fact an endorsement of the democratic process. Valuing voting for its
own sake helps to further the myth that a vote counts as something
besides a point for a candidate. Of course, this is untrue for the reasons
already espoused: Nobody knows why you cast your vote except you,
so there is no sense in which your “voice” has been heard. All your
vote can do is help elect a candidate.
What if, however, this is fine with you? What if you have no illusions
about having your opinions represented in government, but you firmly
believe that one candidate is much better suited for the position and
you want that candidate to win? You think the election might be close
and, and that even if the odds of your vote “mattering” are extremely
low* it is still worth your time to vote. You don’t believe in the
democratic process, but you still have a preference and you don’t care
that you might be “tacitly endorsing” a corrupt system. After all, it’s
not like a “tacit condemnation” by not voting would keep any
politicians up at night, or even be read as anything but forgetfulness.
Why shouldn’t you vote in that case
This is a much harder argument to make,a government is not a set of
policies or a specific group of people in charge—these are temporary
features of a government, but not the same as the government itself.
Rather a government is the system of determining which people are in
charge and, by extension, the policies they enact.
What this means, though, is that if a government has a legitimate
authority, then it doesn’t cease to have it once its leaders or policies
change. In other words, the laws still apply to you even if the guy you
vote for loses. Basically, you can’t only play by the rules when they
work out in your favor. If you did, the rules wouldn’t retain any
legitimacy, and would therefore serve no function. Entering into a
system of government is akin to agreeing to abide by the rules even
when the outcome may not seem beneficial.
How, though, does one “enter into a system of government”? By
merely being born in its geographical bounds? By paying taxes? By
taking advantage of the services provided by the government? Well,
standards may vary, but it’s hard to imagine any standard that does not
count direct participation in the governmental system as “entering
into” it. By this logic, then, a vote in an election is not simply a
statement of preference, but an agreement to abide by the result of the
election’s outcome. It would, after all, be ethically dubious to vote
without such an implied agreement, since on the one hand you are
expecting your vote to have authority over others while not respecting
their reciprocal authority on you.

WHY AND HOW SHOULD

VOTING MADE
COMPULSORY ?

It is the duty of every citizen to vote in an election. Unbelievable

though, it is the uneducated who will turn up to vote and educated
individuals like us would prefer to seek comfort in our homes, watch
an IPL match or have an extended weekend given that the election day
is a public holiday. It is we who will complain about black money, bad
roads, poor airports, etc.

The Educated Upper Middle Class (EUMC) of India are the

quintessential hypocrites. We don't discharge our duties but demand
our rights. We have a misleading feeling that since we pay our taxes
"honestly" our duty towards the country terminates. Let us remind
ourselves that our "honesty" in paying taxes is due to the fact that most
of it is deducted at source or else we would have been no better. The
best example of our unruly behavior is the way we conduct ourselves
in traffic and how we discharge our civic responsibilities.

The EUMC is the backbone of any country. They have to be

accountable and responsible in their public behavior. We have to be the
role model for the society. We have the voice, aware of rights and have
got means to exercise it. Hence, we must compulsorily vote. Since
voluntary compliance is not our forte, the only option is to make us
comply.

The EUMC is mostly urban based and easily identifiable because all of
them all are "honest tax payers" by compulsion.

The Government should bring in certain changes in the voting process.

To begin with we require a National Identity Card, which should
double up as the Electoral ID card as well as PAN card. This number
should be compulsorily registered in the Passport, Gas
connection,Water and Power boards. Every citizen casting a vote
should get a self generated receipt indicating his name and National
Identity Card Number and that he/she has voted. It will be the SOLE
RESPONSIBILITY of a citizen to ensure that his name is there on the
electoral rolls since sufficient advertisement and opportunity is given
by the Government to include one's name in the electoral roll. Also you
can check up online whether or not your name is present in the
electoral rolls

We have no problem in going on pligrimage eventhough we are not

confident whether or not God will answer our prayers or not. We
have no problem in going to the doctor when we are ill though we
are not sure whether he will cure us of our illness. We have no
problem in attending weddings and parties though we are not sure
whether those persons will be with us in future. We only have all
sort of mindblocks when it comes to voting

In all those years when elections are held, it would be duty of the
citizen to provide a copy of the "vote casted" receipt to the tax
authorities, power and water boards. If a citizen was away from town
on official duty, he has to prove it for getting an exemption. Those
citizens who don't cast their votes despite being in town should be
levied double taxes: their passports freezed for five years; power and
water rates tripled for them and domestic cylinders supplied to them
without subsidy and double the market rates. If these persons are
working in Government/limited companies, they should be denied
increment for the next 2 years. The methods are perfectly practicable,
only we need to get the process of a National Identity Card in place.

The above suggestions may seem harsh but that is the only way the
EUMC can be made to shift out of the couches on election day. As far
as those who don't vote these elections, just learn to live like slaves and
don't talk about the ills of governance because you missed the bus
when it mattered.

CONCLUSION

Election is one of the important civic duties and legal

right of all citizens. The validity of the vote of a legal
resident in favor of a candidate is equivalent to that of a
president or a prime minister of the same country.
People when omit expressing their political preference,
they indirectly help elect certain candidates with
different idiosyncratic inclination to occupy both
legislative and executive positions in municipal, state
and national levels.

There are only 32 countries on the globe where the

voting is compulsory including Argentina, Australia,
Belgium, Brazil and Switzerland. Voting is optional in
the countries like Bolivia, Greece, India, Mexico, Italy, U
S A and Venezuela. Compulsory system of voting
generates interest and enthusiasm among people who
are least bothered of their own well being. Do you agree
with the idea of implementing the exercise of vote a
compulsory act in every country?
Humans have evolved through their thinking capacity
and doing what they thought was right so far. The
human history demonstrates clearly the achievements
of all sorts which are fully reflected in the normal
functioning of well organized society in our present
physical world. Quality of life of the residents of a nation
is strongly influenced by the decisions made by both
legislative and executive personnel of that country. In a
globalized economy, even a citizen of a small and far
away country is affected profoundly by the nature of the
personality of the leader occupying the highest position
of a great nation.

The world democracy is often used by the media when

the will of the majority of people of a nation is
suppressed by authoritative dictatorship. The
democratic regime of governing body of a country is
proved to be the best form of administrative
management system of all the essential services for the
benefit of the population with the resources generated
by their taxes. Democracy is the equalitarian
governmental system where the leaders are elected by
the majority rule (more than half) of people under free
electoral system. The selection of the candidate to
participate in elections on behalf of a party is the
concern of the party representatives. But the final
choice of the eligible contester must be the
responsibility of all the voters.
Making vote a mandatory act requires an enforcement
of a law which may be attached with some punishing
strings for nonvoters. The electorate board of the
countries where the voting is mandatory, observe subtle
corrective educational measures to discipline and value
the act of voting. Persons who could not vote on the day
are asked to inform by many functional ways to the
local of electoral sector, the reason behind their failure
of casting vote. The failure of informing the absentee
vote is threaded to some other activities of the voter so
as to educate him to engage in voting.
You are not only risking of your own well being by
neglecting your civic right, but you are putting in danger
the life of more than half a dozen billions of people of
the world in danger. Do not be influenced by the mob
opinion. Do not allow others decide for you. You are sole
owner of your holy will. You have a privileged mind and
to put it to work. You are sure about one thing that you
would know whom to vote based on your own analysis
discernments.
Do not bother even when you happen to make mistakes
in your choice. The people with wisdom learn from the
mistakes of others but intelligent ones learn from their
own mistakes. The ignorant people neither learn from
their own mistakes nor from the mistakes of others. Be
both wise and intelligent but never candidate for the
title of ignorant. Choose the right person for the post he
or she deserves to occupy for the sake of your well
being and the well being of billions of others.

It is time to convert the non thinkers into thinking living

beings to decide for their future. The responsible
citizens are capable of choosing responsible leaders. The
owner of a business establishment has right to choose
his working staff among many who are in search of a
suitable placement to earn their living. This
businessman is looking forward to grow in his
entrepreneurship through the capable, dedicated,
honest, wise and humble employee. Each citizen is the
legitimate owner of his country of citizenship. He or she
should not throw away the opportunity to exercise his or
her will in choosing the right person for the job.