Acting now to stop dummy candidates

The 2019th presidential election cost over Rs. 7 billion. This includes Rs. 200 million that had to be spent extra due the record number of candidates who contested, according to Election Commission (EC) Chairman Mahinda Deshapriya.

By Sandun Jayawardana
The 2019th presidential election cost over Rs. 7 billion. This includes Rs. 200 million that had to be spent extra due the record number of candidates who contested, according to Election Commission (EC) Chairman Mahinda Deshapriya.

It was clear to just about everyone that there were so many “dummy” candidates among the 35 presidential hopefuls. Yet frustratingly, there are currently no laws to limit such persons from contesting, resulting in millions of rupees in taxpayer funds going down the drain to accommodate them. 

The 2019 presidential poll brought this issue out into the public consciousness unlike any other election. The EC was quite candid about the difficulties caused by having 35 candidates contesting the poll. Commission Chairman Mr Deshapriya publicly spoke about the extra funds needed for the exercise. 

The ballot paper itself measured two feet (26cm) as it had to contain all 35 names of the candidates along with their symbols. There were real fears that some voters would struggle to identify the name and symbol of the candidate of their choice.

Anticipating these difficulties, authorities even went to the extent of extending the voting time by one hour as a way to give more time for voters cast their ballots. They also added extra polling booths to many polling centres to minimise difficulties.  

The fact that nearly 85 percent of eligible voters exercised their franchised at the November 16 election is a testament to the professionalism and efficiency of the EC, its officials and all others engaged in election duties. There were very few incidents of voters being inconvenienced at polling centres.  

Unfortunately, the presence of dummy candidates did create issues aside from sending costs skyrocketing. There were reports that a considerable number of voters in the north who had been meaning to cast their votes for one candidate ended up voting for another because they became confused by the symbols of the two, which looked alike to them.

The EC itself publicly stated that a significant number of the minor candidates were overtly or covertly supporting one or the other of the main candidates. Yet, beyond mentioning this problem, the Commission did not go to the extent of naming and shaming such candidates as it did not wish to appear as being biased.

All candidates who contest the presidential election are allowed free airtime on state media. They can have up to two polling agents at each polling centre and up to five at each counting centre. They get the media exposure and the publicity that goes with it. Some of the “dummy” candidates who ended up supporting the winning candidate may ultimately also get other perks such as appointments to key state institutions.

In effect, being a dummy candidate is an excellent public relations move that stand to bring in financial and other rewards that would more than compensate for the paltry sum of the deposit money one will lose after the polls.   

There are currently no laws to prevent dummy candidates from contesting presidential elections. One of the major reasons why so many can currently contest is that the deposit money that a candidate can contest remains stunningly low. It is still only Rs. 50, 000 for a candidate representing a recognized political party and Rs. 75, 000 for someone contesting independently. This was the same amount that existed during the very first presidential election in 1982.

While it may have been a significant amount then, this amount can easily be absorbed by political parties and independents now. Remember that aside from the two main candidates, all 33 others who contested the 2019 presidential poll lost their depostis as they could not obtain 5 percent of the valid votes cast.    

The EC has suggested several ways that the presence of dummy candidates can be curbed. The best and perhaps the most practical suggestion seems to substantially increase the deposit amount required to contest the election.

Another proposal is to have a first round “run-off” which would disqualify candidates who fail to poll a designated percentage of the votes. Another is to increase the number of affidavits a candidate should submit to contest. 

The task of bringing laws to prevent such candidates from contesting though, falls to parliament. The EC can only make suggestions. It is up to the legislature to draft those laws and duly pass them. Clearly, parliament should look into this as a matter of priority as failure to bring in such laws would only pave the way for more dummy candidates to contest future elections.

What happens if the laws aren’t changed and we have 50 candidates contesting the next presidential election in five years’ time? How much more will the country’s citizens have to pay to continue this farce?

Unfortunately, parliament has been lethargic at best to bring in such laws to ensure a free and fair election with a level playing field. Laws on setting limits for campaign finances for example, are yet to see the light of day while the EC remains powerless to act against openly biased coverage and “fake news” being spread by private media during campaign periods. 

With a parliamentary election due by April of next year, there are increasingly vocal calls for tougher election laws. Even parliamentary elections are likely to be contested by a large number of parties; many of who don’t stand a chance of having a single MP elected to the 225 member legislature.

In some other countries, there are laws granting the EC powers to de-register political parties who fail to have a single member elected to the legislature during a specified time period. There is no reason why the EC in this country should not have such powers. 

The bottom line is, the system needs to change. Having dummy candidates contesting presidential polls should end at least with this election. Those who have the necessary powers need to act now.