A matrix for voters:

Choosing the good, rejecting the bad

by Somapala Gunadheera

Political parties have given nominations to their candidates for the August 17 General Election. Much has been said on how to choose contestants for the General Election but most of it appears to have fallen on deaf ears. The mixture is almost as before, with a few new additions.

The National Lists of the respective parties do not appear to have effectively broken the monotony of the past. In this scenario, the voter is called upon to make the best out of a bad bargain. He/she has to rise to the occasion by making a judicious selection in his/her preferences by discarding the rotten in the old and choosing the best in the new.

Choice of a political party is by far, an intuitive process. It is conditioned by a number of factors that have a bearing on a voter’s personal preferences such as:

Hereditary inclinations
Political values
Desire for change
Preference for stability
Protection of parochial interests
Need/desire for good governance
Advantages of efficient management
Class interests
Personal gain and so on.

Right to choose a party

It is for the rival political parties to market themselves among voters and attract them to their fold. They use all devices, legal, illegal, proper, improper, persuasive and oppressive, to achieve this purpose. In any case, this writer has no interest in converting loyalties from one party to another. Such civic adjustment is principally a job for our educationists.

Here, I take the preference of a voter for any political party for granted as his/her fundamental right, but attempt to seek a method by which he/she might make an optimum choice of candidates within his/her selected party. Such a choice would doubtlessly accrue not only to the voter's advantage, but also to the larger interests of the country as a whole.

Normally, not much attention is paid to the selection of a candidate for whom one casts a vote. It is dealt with as a matter of course, in a casual manner.

The tendency is to accept the ‘known devil’ without bothering oneself to go into the merits of the ‘unknown angel.’ Some cast their votes under dictation by trusted friends and superiors or for a fee. More often than not, many voters decide their preferences at the spur of the moment of voting.

Such a lackadaisical attitude towards the casting of a vote is mainly responsible for the quality of the legislators we have been saddled with. In that sense, voters have no right to complain against their representatives on their performance or the lack of it.

They only get the legislators they deserve. If voters are genuinely interested in fortifying the legislature with representatives of quality, the crucial moment for it has arrived with the forthcoming election. "Gather ye rosebuds while ye may" failing which, “you may forever tarry” – at least for the next five years.

I present the following matrix to every voter to enable the choice of the best candidates for whom a vote may be cast at the election. It consists of two parts.

Part I is used to eliminate the ‘good-for-nothings’ from the list, winnowing out the chaff. Part II helps to pick up the best out of the undeleted candidates.

Elimination theory

The selection process begins with the elimination of those who have to be deleted at first sight for reasons that the voter considers to be critical. These reasons may be:

1. Passed the normal age of retirement
2. Betrayal of the party after election
3. Indulging in thuggery and violence
4. Neglecting the electorate as an elected legislator
5. Amassing wealth from politics
6. Bribery and corruption
7. Moral turpitude and misbehaviour
8. Abuse of women and children, murder
9. Smuggling, money laundering and trafficking
10. Dealing with narcotics, drugs and illegal intoxicants
11. Resorting to communal, racial or religious extremism
12. Utilizing State funds and facilities for personal gain
13. Traitorous conduct jeopardizing

national interest

This list is not exhaustive by any means. Moreover every voter may not accept any or all of the above reasons for outright rejection of a candidate. Similarly, a voter may have other reasons for knocking down a contestant to begin with and he is entitled to his choice. The tentative list given above, may be added to or subtracted from, at the voter’s pleasure.

Whatever the accepted criteria may be, the initial process of summary elimination is likely to more than halve the existing list. Thus, the first step obliges the voter to identify his/her reasons for discarding a candidate from the ballot paper and to delete him/her forthwith.

Prioritization

The next stage of the selection consists of another list of criteria acceptable to the voter. This list may include one or more reasons from List I, even if they had been disregarded for total elimination. Tentatively, List 2 may include the following for the purpose of grading the candidate not deleted in List I. Here again, the list may be expanded or contracted at the voters’ choice.

A. Loyalty to the country as citizen
B. Public property management
C. Public fund utilization
D. Family representation in legislature and executive
E. Level of education
F. Conduct in private life
G. Conduct in public life
H. Observance of election law
I. Performance in public office
J. Declaration of assets before election
K. Level of social service
L. Leadership
M. Age and experience

Having chosen the criteria under which the short-listed candidates are to be evaluated, the voter then proceeds to give each of them a mark between 0 and 10, in respect of every chosen criterion.

Evidently, positive factors will fetch more marks and the negatives, vice versa. Then the voter is able to add up the total marks obtained individually by the shortlisted candidates. Preference votes go to the three scoring the highest marks.

How does a voter decide on questions raised by the matrix? If he goes to court for the purpose, normally answers relevant to the present election will reach him/her several elections later. What he/she needs therefore, is an immediate answer.

That answer lies within. Ever since birth, a person gathers day to day experience, a wealth of information about the society in which one lives. That consciousness would provide the competence to answer the questions raised by the matrix, intuitively.

Even if the ideal selection process may not be strictly adhered to by some due to indolence, all will not be lost. The mental discipline inculcated by following the selection process would instill a thought process that could lead to a rough mental calculation of the rating of a candidate, intuitively. Even that would be far better than marking preferences 'by the toss of coin' after entering the voting cubicle.

Gender equality

Political parties can help this process by bringing out a hand-out containing a brief account of all its candidates for each district. This may be hand-delivered to each household by political party agents who go round canvassing.

The pamphlet, if properly prepared, would introduce the candidates to the voters and provide information based on which they could make their choice satisfactorily. In the long run, it would also help to reduce a lot of pulp, paper and polythene that is ruining the environment.

In conclusion, I may be permitted to make a plea for the sake of gender equality. If the three persons that surface on top, when the matrix is applied, are all males, the third place may be given to the female who has come closest to the top.

That would amount to substantive justice and affirmative action needed to rectify historical gender imbalance, until parity is finally attained under a ‘five star democracy’ of the future.

I move that all institutions devoted to electoral reform come together in time to spread the idea of a Voters’ Matrix as widely and effectively as they could.

They can help by distributing printed blank formats that a voter could use at his/her discretion in selecting candidates for voting.

There is no doubt that if this campaign is efficiently organized, the next Parliament would be adorned with the best faces we could have under the present circumstances.