Multi-cornered contests cut majority say in Lok Sabha

How many votes does a candidate need to get elected to the Lok Sabha? If election commission statistics are anything to go by, a little over 10% of the electorate in a constituency.

This is especially true in constituencies where there are multi-cornered contests, a trend that is increasing by the Lok Sabha. Most noticeable is the case of Uttar Pradesh (UP), which sends a whopping 80 members to parliament. Almost all seats in the state saw three- or four-cornered fights in 2004, with less than 50% of the electorate exercising its franchise.

A similar trend was witnessed in several other constituencies in north and central parts of the country, where polling percentage hovers around just 50. The increasing fragmentation of Indian politics doesn’t augur well for the basic first-past-the-post (FPTP), or simple majority, concept of voting. This has been worrying constitutional experts and national review committees such as the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC), which submitted its report in 2002.

The situation is acute in states where three- or four-cornered fights have become a norm. The explicit aim of FPTP is to promote two-party politics. But the increasing number of regional parties is leaving a majority of voters without representation in the Lok Sabha.

Many, however, argue that the fragmentation is representative of India’s diversity and is good for a federal government. In Basti, Mohanlal Ganj and Robertsganj constituencies of UP, candidates got less than 12% of the total votes in 2004. In the state’s 59 constituencies, winners polled less than 20% of the total votes.

The fact that voting percentage was less than 50 in UP and other big states such as Madhya Pradesh makes one thing clear, that a winning candidate needs to concentrate only on a group, say a caste or a religion, or a couple of groups (vote banks) that may add up to about 20% of the total votes in a constituency.

A candidate campaigning selectively and winning support of one or two groups could win, even if majority vote is against him, because those opposed to the eventual winner cast their votes with several candidates.

In 2002, NCRWC admitted this, saying, “The representative character of the representatives itself becomes doubtful and their representational legitimacy is seriously eroded. In many cases, more votes are cast against the winning candidates than for them.”

The election commission recently pointed out, “While in Tamil Nadu on most seats the winning candidates secured over 50% of the votes polled (34 of 39 seats), in Uttar Pradesh, only nine of the 80 seats were won by this margin.

“In Andhra, 29 of the 42 seats were won by over 50% of the votes cast, while in Bihar, only 11 winners could get over 50% votes.”

In states such as West Bengal, Rajasthan and Orissa, over 50% of winners polled over 50% of the votes cast. These states were followed by Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh, which sent a noticeable number of candidates with over 50% vote share.

Delhi had the distinct identity of sending all its seven MPs with over 50% votes, while only one in neighbouring Haryana’s 10 Lok Sabha members could cross the mark.
In the northeast, the democracy is actually most vibrant in this context. In Mizoram, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh, all Lok Sabha winners pocketed over 50% vote share.

In the 14th Lok Sabha, 324 of the 543 (almost 60%) winning candidates couldn’t muster a 50% vote share. Considering the fact that in several states less than 50% votes are polled, 60% of the winners represented only a quarter of the voters in their constituencies. Meaning, a majority of voters are not directly represented in parliament.