We often talk about rights advocates. Usually, they are devoted individuals who would risk their personal freedom and sometimes life for the sake of protecting the rights of other people. They occasionally form groups, for instance, Helsinki Group in the USSR. In authoritarian states, such groups are being persecuted (the USSR is a “good” example). In democracy states, such groups often focus at the problems of human rights in other countries.
Anyway, we are talking not about rights today. We are talking about duties. In contrast to the multitude of rights, there are very few duties. We have to pay taxes and public utility charges and… Exactly, we have to participate in elections – both regional and national. In this latter case voting is also a right and we may decide whether to invoke it or not. That’s how things are in the majority of democratic countries. Hence the paradox – great and fateful decisions are taken by the majority of those who have headed to the polls and in the default mode by the minority of the population that has a right to vote but does not invoke it.
As to the financial duties, individuals and groups seem not to be much concerned. Quite the opposite, they try to avoid their financial duties. The rights of the state begin with the duties of the citizens. The state possesses powerful instruments to make people responsible (including criminal responsibility). There are tax police and tax inspection and now there is also National anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine and public prosecution office.
Participation in the election is something in between. Not all citizens are anxious to head to the polls and the state has not taken any single step to mobilize the voters. By not voting, people provide the state and regional public officials with a spacious room for manipulations.
I recollect a five-year-old episode when I was taking a ride in a fixed-route taxi right after the elections. Two women argued loudly and expressed indignation. They were two secondary school teachers. Someone obliged all teachers to come to the polls at their weekend to fill out the voting papers. Naturally, they talked about the votes rigged. But their indignation was not about the rigged votes as much as about the fact that poor women did not get their day off in return for the weekend they had spent carrying out the illegal order.
I heard that talk and everybody else (excluding those listening to music with their headphones on) did, too. Everybody heard but nobody reacted… I did not react either. We are quite tolerant of the violation of our civic duties as opposed to the violation of our rights!
Our duties should also be protected! And that will happen only with the initiative of community-based organizations. They may send their representatives to monitor the voting process and help avoid ballot box stuffing and the so-called “vote miscounts”. But not a single community-based organization will be able to take a voter by the hand and bring him or her to the poll. As a result, the factual voters are those who belong to a certain social stratum – a considerable number of pensioners. The young traditionally avoid voting except for the right- and left-wing radicals…
And now there is a hot discussion in social nets aimed not at involving those who ignore elections but at limiting the rights of those who go and vote. This applies especially to senior citizens. What is really funny – the retirement age has increased whereas the bloggers propose to alienate 50+ voters. They also propose to have the voters’ IQ measured. The latter is impossible not only because of ethical but also technical reasons. Intelligence quotient measurement requires a lot of time and a great number of qualified psychologists. To say nothing of the fact that age limitation is a serious violation of basic democracy foundations. It follows thence that our duties also need to be protected.
Borys Khersonskyi