Political
Options and Voting Options
Presently
there is generally political anarchy in this country.
There
is no streamlining of options.
Any
fool from any political party can pretend to be a candidate and may
start campaign soliciting (a formal bribe).
In
other words asking for bribes.
Anybody
who contributes to these guys is a fool.
I do
not intend to educate fools.
Here
is a point the Election Commissioner and his team should solve for
the average voter to make proper voting options.
I
request all to come for voting.
Abstaining
from voting at this juncture is almost a criminal offense, if not,
individual responsibility being wasted when offered free.
One
cannot claim foul play, if one has not used his/her option judiciously.
My
consideration here is how the option is counted after polling is
declared closed.
Point
number one is all the valid votes should be given equal validity and
weight.
Selecting
only the first three candidates polling top is rejecting a vast
majority who opposed the top three.
Let
me dissect it which no candidate seems to be willing to explain to the voter.
My
assumption is nobody will get the 50% clearance.
In
that scenario, if one takes the top three voting as 40%, 35% and 10%
and using the second option of 10% to decide the winner is a total
aberration and third candidate is voted out by default.
Of
course second option of the 15% left out (say 8% and 5% and 2% ext;) is not
taken into consideration.
My
suggestion is the second option of the top two should be counted and
should be added to the third as an option, instead of voting out the
third by arbitrary default option.
It is
very unlikely that the top two will get 50% even if the third
candidates option is equally shared (becomes 45% and 40%).
If
the second option of the first and second is equally shared with the
third, the third candidate might even get more than 45% (or even fifty
but very unlikely) which is more than the first past the post
counting.
This
is a mockery of political justice.
When
this happens one or a few fools will go to courts for redress.
My
bone of contention is that court should be free of arbitrary political
justice.
There
is a window of opportunity as in Zimbabwe for a military dictator to
step in.
So my
suggestion is for the election commissioner to take legal advice and
declare the election null and void and have a reelection for the first
three (only those three are eligible) candidates.
There
should be no second option and whoever who tops irrespective of the
50% margin should be declared winner.
The
third option has theoretically 25% at his/her stake or disposal and
the top two also could be vying for a portion of that 25%.
Finally
first past the vote wins and second option is discounted by default.
Why
our parliament can sit down and have a contingency plan to avoid
military insinuation (there were attempts in the past from Felix Dias
Bandaranayike to current day) is open to question and avoiding
political anarchy (not theoretical but given the ground situation
it is really possible) is of paramount importance?
