THE main cause of low voter turnout is the internal contradiction of democracy in allowing the freedom to vote or not to vote.

If a person has the right not to vote and he or she exercises this right, there is nothing you can do about that.

However, if voting is made compulsory, then this contradiction disappears.

The laws need to be amended to pave the way for compulsory voting.

Making voting compulsory doesn’t mean that those who are “found guilty” of not voting will face a hefty fine or long imprisonment term.

The way it is practised in Singapore, which is one of the few countries in the world that implement compulsory voting, as explained by some of my Singaporean friends, is if you do not vote in an election, nothing will happen to you in the immediate term.

But come the time for the next election, as the country’s Election Commission (EC) is updating its electoral register, your name will appear as someone who did not vote in the previous polls.

A show-cause letter is then sent to you on why you should remain on the electoral roll. If you ignore the letter, nothing will happen to you except that your name will be taken off the electoral roll, which means that you cannot vote in the coming election.

It is like you are voluntarily disenfranchising yourself by remaining quiet.

But if you respond to the letter by stating the reason for your absence in the last election, and the Singapore EC accepts your reason, your name remains on the electoral roll for the coming election.

Some of the acceptable reasons are: working overseas (including being on a business trip) at the time of the polls; studying overseas at the time of the polls; living with the spouse who is working or studying overseas; overseas vacation; and illness, or delivering a baby.

If the reason is rejected by the EC, then you will be taken off the register and you need to pay a nominal sum to reinstate your name on the electoral roll.

For as long as you don’t pay this “fine”, you cannot vote. It is as if you are voluntarily disenfranchising yourself for life.

But at any time after voluntarily disenfranchising yourself, if you miss voting, all you need to do is to pay the “fine” for your name to be reinstated on the electoral roll.

With this compulsory voting, Singapore has never faced a low voter turnout. At the same time, the democratic freedom of not to vote is allowed because no one is subjected to hefty fines or imprisonment for not voting.

Of course, the Singapore EC will do its part via an education programme to encourage citizens to vote because a fundamental right of citizenship is the civic responsibility to be exercised by citizens to choose and elect their leaders in a democracy.

The two greatest democracies of the world – the United States and the United Kingdom – until today do not make it compulsory for their citizens to vote.

Considering that the US is willing to go to war to spread democracy, it is indeed hypocrisy of the highest order for it not to make voting compulsory among its citizens.

Some scholars in the US prefer to call compulsory voting as universal voting because “compulsory voting” is seen as a proposition that is forcing citizens to choose a candidate or party, which might legitimately be construed by the courts as compulsory speech.

In universal voting, voters would be free to cast a blank ballot. And to stress the freedom not to make a choice, these scholars propose including a “none of the above” option, which in our part of the world is deemed spoilt votes.

Universal voting in the US is seen by some as a game changer to move on from vacillating between inclusion and exclusion, and between embracing democracy and retreating.

As of January 2020, of the 36 member states of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, only three had forms of compulsory voting, which are enforced – Australia, Belgium and Luxembourg.

Additionally, Greece, Mexico and Turkey have compulsory voting theoretically, but it is not enforced.

As for e-voting, it will face the same problem of the internal contradiction of democracy because there is only so much that you can do to encourage people to vote when their right not to vote is always there.

The only advantage of e-voting is the hefty lower cost of organising an election and the relatively hassle-free voting for the voters.

State polls in Malaysia since the 14th general election have cost the government RM420 million, with the recent Johor polls accounting for nearly RM100 million of the bill.

The EC’s total expenses for the state polls were RM130 million in Sabah, RM45 million in Malacca and RM149 million in Sarawak.

The expenses included the rent for equipment and vehicles, technology development, logistics solutions, allowances for EC staff and items needed to adhere to the Covid-19 standard operating procedures.

The Malacca and Johor elections cost RM13 million and RM35 million more respectively, than the last time the states elected a new state assembly in 2018.

As some experts have said e-voting can cut the cost of organising an election by more than half, it should, therefore, be implemented together with making voting compulsory for the purpose of preventing a low voter turnout. – March 28. 2022.

* Jamari Mohtar reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.