Opinion Lotus position

The EC ordered the Gujarat police to file an FIR, saying that his action “was in the nature of political speech intended and calculated to influence and affect the result of elections in the constituencies going to polls today.” While the EC is right to enforce the law, it may be time to examine the shaky premise of these sections.

Given that the election is a month-long affair, staggered across multiple phases, with saturation media coverage, it is impossible to seal off voting regions, or imagine that voters operate in a bubble free of political messaging. The national media continues to beam political reports and advertisements, even on voting day. Social media is a realm of its own, where it is impossible to stop the incessant flow of campaign pitches. Voters encounter party appeals on YouTube, Facebook or Twitter, even if door-to-door campaigning has ceased.

In an effort to protect free decision-making, the EC has questioned the business of opinion polling and tried to monitor social media, both unwise moves. With the latter, it is matter of practicality rather than principle, given how difficult it is to separate bought endorsements from spontaneous expression or a believer’s sincere attempts to influence others.

On all these fronts, the EC overestimates the power of media to change voting decisions. It would do better to trust that voters are informed adults, responsible for their own judgements, and unlikely to be swayed at the last minute by the sight of a party symbol. And given that these symbols are drawn from the everyday world, the EC would have a hard time telling apart innocent displays of the symbol and active propaganda.

Can any human palm, cycle or broom be interpreted as a call to vote in specific ways? Instead of trying to protect the voter from subliminal mind-bending, the EC is better off concentrating on areas it can control, and acting with sobriety and perspective when it comes to disciplining political parties.