Shun Negative Poll Campaign

As the November 20 election fever reaches its final moment, political parties, their leaders, workers and cadres are deeply engaged in their last hour bid to woo voters. While senior leaders are attending and addressing rallies across the nation, candidates and party workers are participating in door-to-door canvassing. Besides, different quarters such media houses, security organs and others are engaged in dissecting the poll results while many others are immersed in guessing games as to who would win the elections in both first-past-the-post and proportional representation systems.

Other actions, particularly on social media platforms, have targeted election candidates as the country prepares to elect federal and provincial legislatures at the same time. Contestants who have competed in elections for numerous years have been targeted by a social media movement dubbed "No, Not Again." There has also been "smear campaigning" against candidates who are older in age and who have fought many past elections. These campaigns, which were likely started to disparage candidates representing political parties, have actually created shockwaves among candidates, who have previously enjoyed varied positions by becoming legislators, ministers, and prime ministers.

‘No, Not Again’ campaign

The "No, Not Again" campaign has not only surprised leaders and candidates, but it has also recently raised hackles of the Election Commission, which intends to call the promoters of this internet campaign to task. However, the Supreme Court barred the EC from pursuing action against the promoters, citing the EC action as a violation of free speech. Though the EC subsequently warned promoters to use civilised language in their campaigns, it and many others must have worried that the "No, Not Again" campaign would spread rumours and animosity against senior leaders who became poll candidates after their party endorsed their candidacy.

Despite its negative connotation, the "No, Not Again" movement gained traction on social media platforms precisely because there is a dispute over whether voters should vote for re-electing older faces.One has the right to pick someone, but they must also have the option of not choosing someone they dislike. Many campaigners contend that voters should have the right to reject a candidate via their mandate. This desire has taken root as a result of previous performances by certain leaders that have disappointed their constituents. Many of these elected officials seem to have failed to deliver on their pledges, which is why the current campaign has attacked them.

However, one should not overlook the ideals of multiparty politics and freedom of speech which bar anyone in limiting or discouraging people from using their democratic rights. The aforementioned effort seems to have come for undermining people's right to vote for candidates nominated by the parties that the voters support. The campaign attempts to categorise all candidates in the same group, which is inappropriate in a democracy that enables citizens to choose their representatives via fair, free, and impartial periodic elections.

Meanwhile, throughout this election period, another effort is being run to discredit elder politicians. The perpetrators of this effort attempted to persuade people not to vote for politicians beyond the age of 60. Many accuse the campaign of being initiated by supporters of so-called independent candidates running for seats in the federal parliament. Because many of these independent candidates are younger, they are appealing to young people to vote against older politicians.

Many people believe that the claim made by the supporters of the independent candidates is unfounded. Instances show that a candidate's age cannot impede her or him from making crucial judgments as a legislator or minister or prime minister for the sake of the people and the nation. 

Those who dislike the elderly candidates should remember that the world's oldest democracy and superpower, the United States, has a president, Joe Biden, who will shortly be 80. A few years ago, the same nation elected a president, Donald Trump, at the age of 72. The prime minister of neighbouring India is nearing 70 years old, and the same is true of Bangladesh. Malaysians chose Mahathir Mohammad as Prime Minister when he was 92 years old a few years ago.

 All of these examples demonstrate that age is not and should not be a consideration when a leader leads his or her constituencies and voters to wealth and progress. Having said that, "negative" social media campaigns such as "No, Not Again" or "Do not vote for elderly politicians" may have an influence on a few voters, driving them to avoid "tried, and aged candidates." Nonetheless, many believe that these negative campaigns will generate a few hindrances for politicians who have been running in elections on behalf of political parties having a bigger voting base. Few independent candidates can capitalise on the current social media campaigns, but they cannot harm the chances of established political parties emerging as victors or runners-up in the federal and provincial legislatures.

Poll alliances

A significant proportion of Nepali voters favour established political parties with a lengthy history in the country's political fights. When these parties participate in elections under an electoral alliance, like the Nepali Congress, CPN-Maoist Centre, CPN-Unified Socialist, Loktantrik Samajbadi Party and Rastriya Janamorcha have done, other candidates, including independent ones, will find it difficult to beat the coalition parties. During the 2017 general elections, the UML-Maoist Centre coalition gained a large number of seats in the then-Parliament, relegating the Nepali Congress to a distant second place. This instance shows that anyone intending to achieve political advantage by negative campaigns will be disappointed.

Last but not least, negative efforts have an opposing viewpoint. Though the perpetrators of these campaigns claim to be exercising their democratic rights, they are often the ones who try to undermine the importance of the democratic practice of holding periodic elections, which allow people to give their mandate to their representatives in a free and fair manner. As a result, individuals must be aware of these efforts and avoid falling victim to them.

(Upadhyay is Managing Editor of this daily.)