(Dr. Shashi Tharoor is a two-time MP from Thiruvananthapuram, the Chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs, the former Union Minister of State for External Affairs and Human Resource Development and the former UN Under-Secretary-General. He has written 14 books, including, most recently, Pax Indica: India and the World of the 21st Century.)
Amid all the news events that consumed our attention in January, a Supreme Court decision mid-month of potentially momentous significance has gone largely unnoticed. On January 12, the Supreme Court directed the Central government to enable e-voting by non-resident Indians within eight weeks.
A bench of Chief Justice HL Dattu and AK Sikri asked the Centre to inform it about "further steps taken to implement the suggestions" and posted the matter for a further hearing after eight weeks. Six remain for the next hearing, but only a fortnight for the Central Government to inform the Supreme Court of the steps it has taken to implement the suggestions given by the Election Commission to facilitate NRI voting.
As an NRI myself at the time, I had raised this issue at the Pravasi Bharatiya Divas in Mumbai in 2005, telling the Central Government that it was unfortunate that India was the only major democracy that disenfranchised its own citizens by denying Indian passport holders who happen to be living abroad the right to vote. In my own case, I left India as a student at the age of 19 at a time when the voting age was 21, and never had a chance to vote at all in any Indian election until my return to India for good at the end of my United Nations career three and a half decades later.
My suggestion of NRI voting rights didn't fall on deaf years, but when I eventually returned home, fought elections and joined the government, the UPA's eventual decision on the issue of NRI voting fell somewhat short of my hopes. In 2010, the government allowed the NRIs voting rights, but the rules required them to be present in their constituency on the day of voting and to cast their ballots in the constituency covering the "permanent address" recorded on their Indian passport, which in many cases was long out of date. Not surprisingly, only a few hundred of the estimated 4 to 10 million non-resident Indians have so far exercised their right to vote in this manner since 2010.
NRI petitioners argued in the Supreme Court that this created an "inherent inequality" for NRIs whose job or financial circumstances did not permit them to travel to India to vote and who were therefore unable to exercise the rights granted to citizens by our democracy. On 14 November 2014, the Supreme Court asked the Centre for its views on allowing NRIs to cast their votes in Indian elections through proxy and postal voting (as security personnel serving away from home are allowed to do) and e-ballots. In e-ballot voting, a blank postal ballot paper is emailed to the voter, who has to then fill it in and mail it by post to their constituency, where presumably it would be counted along with other postal ballots on the day of the electoral results.
The apex court was basing itself mainly on a proposal prepared by a 12-member committee led by Vinod Zutshi, Deputy Election Commissioner, for 'Exploring Feasibility of Alternative Options for Voting by Overseas Electors'. Mr Zutshi's report suggested that the e-postal ballot can be used, but only after implementation of a pilot project in one or two constituencies had validated the process. The new government - which at the Pravasi Bharatiya Diwas in Gujarat, the PM's home state, had promised the Indian diaspora more rights and opportunities -- told the Court that it supports this recommendation.
So NRIs unable to come to their home constituencies during elections in India will have two options available to them henceforth: those of voting through proxy voters in the same constituency whom they designate to vote on their behalf, and of an e-postal ballot received electronically and returned by post. The 21st century solution of moving to electronic voting through secure means on the Internet, instead of postal ballot, has not yet been contemplated by our timorous officialdom, even though it would infinitely simplify the process.
But even proxy and postal balloting would make voting much easier for the politically-conscious NRI who can't come home to vote. And it could make a huge difference in some elections. Blue-collar voting from places like the Gulf is bound to show a significant increase under such a change, as will voting by NRIs in countries too far away to contemplate a short voting visit, such as the United States or Canada. The impact could be considerable in a state like Kerala, which has a huge Gulf diaspora whose numbers are often greater than the vote-margin of a victorious candidate -- and where the difference between the ruling coalition and the opposition amounts to just a handful of seats in the State Assembly.
Though many other democracies simply allow their citizens to vote at their own Embassies in the foreign countries where they reside, neither the Electoral Commission nor the Supreme Court appears to be considering that option seriously. Sources suggest that the possibility of allowing NRIs to vote at diplomatic missions abroad has been ruled out since the Ministry of External Affairs fears the practical difficulties of accommodating a large number of NRIs in Embassies where the Indian expatriate population is sometimes larger than the local population - and where the host countries themselves do not have a tradition of democratic franchise and could see large numbers of queuing Indian voters as disruptive or threatening.
Of course a lot of work remains. The existing Representation of the People Act, 1950, whose Section 20(A) governs such matters, will need to be amended. The usually stately pace of the Law Ministry on such matters does not augur well for the Supreme Court's optimistic deadline. Then the Election Commission has to test NRI voting in two Assembly constituencies before being satisfied that it can implement the policy nationally.
This is arguably the most important development in our democratic process since the introduction of free and universal franchise in 1952. Given the size, the political savvy and the influence of millions of non-resident Indians, the impact on our democracy could be huge. The BJP, of course, senses political advantage in making it easier for NRIs to vote. But the rest of us have sympathizers abroad too, and we should welcome this as strengthening Indian democracy, not merely the political base of one party.
As a former Pravasi Bharati myself, I'm delighted that justice is at last being done. I just wish it had happened four decades ago, so I could have voted more often than I have.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. NDTV is not responsible for the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information on this article. All information is provided on an as-is basis. The information, facts or opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of NDTV and NDTV does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.