Unopposed Candidates in Polls

 SC Moots Min. Vote threshold for Unopposed Candidates in Polls

Extract from the article:
The Supreme Court of India recently floated a thought-provoking idea to introduce a minimum vote threshold for candidates contesting elections unopposed. Essentially, this means that even if a candidate faces no opposition in an electoral contest, they would not be automatically declared elected unless they receive a minimum percentage of votes from the electorate. This suggestion came during court proceedings where the Election Commission acknowledged that unopposed victories are extremely rare — only nine such instances since the Representation of People Act was enacted. The court’s intention is to safeguard democratic legitimacy, ensuring that the elected representative commands genuine public support rather than being a mere default winner by technicality.

The Court has, however, characterized this proposal as hypothetical, inviting the Central Government’s response. Such a measure would compel candidates to secure active voter endorsement, potentially curtailing political maneuvering that results in unopposed wins through coercion, backroom deals, or strategic withdrawals. It also reinforces the principle that democracy thrives on choice, competition, and popular mandate rather than uncontested power grabs. Introducing a voting threshold for unopposed candidates could therefore be a subtle but transformative reform to uphold the spirit of electoral accountability and citizen representation in both Parliament and state assemblies.

My Take:
A. Saluting Supreme Solution from SC
"Reflecting on earlier judicial wisdom about the sanctity of electoral processes, I had applauded the Supreme Court’s affirmation that Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) remain a robust mechanism amidst calls for reverting to outdated methods. The insistence on preserving procedural integrity in elections mirrors the current discussion on reinforcing democracy through substantive voter endorsement. Just as the Court cautioned against undermining EVMs without concrete justification, it today rightly scrutinizes the simplistic acceptance of unopposed candidates without genuine votes. Both stances emphasize that the procedural façade is insufficient; the democratic process demands active participation and transparency. It resonates strongly with my view that electoral reforms must safeguard not only mechanics but also the mandate’s moral legitimacy."

B. N O T A (None Of The Above)
"In this older post, I dwelt on empowering voters through the NOTA option — an emblematic voice against unworthy candidates. The core idea was to engender electoral accountability by allowing voters an explicit 'no confidence' expression. The Supreme Court’s current proposal on minimal vote thresholds for unopposed candidates extends this paradigm by demanding affirmative public consent rather than passive acceptance. Both concepts emerge from the same democratic impulse: voters are not mere spectators but active arbiters whose silence cannot be exploited. The NOTA button reflects voters’ aspirational desire for integrity, while the vote threshold reinforces that unopposed victories should not translate into automatic legitimacy. Together, they signify necessary incremental steps toward a more participatory and responsible electoral democracy."

Call to Action:
To the Election Commission of India and the Central Government: This is an opportune moment to embrace and implement reforms that deepen democratic legitimacy. The proposal to mandate a vote threshold for unopposed candidates is not just a procedural tweak; it is a vital guardrail preserving the authenticity of public mandate. I urge policymakers to proactively consider this suggestion, consult widely, and introduce legislation or guidelines ensuring that no candidate can assume office purely by default. Voters deserve representatives who have earned their trust explicitly, even in uncontested elections. Let electoral reforms synchronize with the evolving democratic ethos where consent is active, not assumed.

With regards, 

Hemen Parekh

www.My-Teacher.in