Kgp Elections: A Relook

It is now two weeks since the demise of Rohit Kumar.

Nobody wishes to recall the events of the previous fortnight any more. The focus has shifted to more exciting events in the campus. The 'Student Body Elections' have become the talking point of all Bhaat/Adda sessions.

It has been a week of anticipation. Who is going to be the new VP (Vice President)? What are the proposals that the candidates have presented? Who has better credentials? What kind of fellow is (s)he?

Emotions have been flying high. Even the seemingly insignificant rumour has spread like wild fire in the campus. Every hall has been backing their candidates furiously - tooth and nail. In such a situation, it is the 1st year hall - MMM which has become the deciding factor. The hall that could make it or break it.

Everything has been rehearsed over and over again. Nothing has been left to chance. The SOP (Statement of Purpose) box is very harsh. The candidates have to get their facts right. There is no choice.

There is a model code of conduct to be followed during campaigning. Whoever breaks it faces action.

The polling takes place in the common room of the respective halls. Election officers are present to ensure that the election process is free, fair and smooth.

It was my first opportunity to elect representatives of my own. I decided to be a responsible voter. I set aside a few criteria which would decide a candidate's 'deservability' for a post.

Credibility

Credibility as the dictionary defines it is 'to be believable'. To be believable, one has to stick to the truth. When I mean truth - I mean the COMPLETE TRUTH. I do not wish to have a representative who is not credible. If (s)he isn't credible, (s)he would not command authority. Without authority, it would be very difficult to get even the simplest of tasks done.

Reachability

Is the candidate open to new ideas? Does his/her agenda encompass only a minority of the student population or is it for the benefit of the average Kgpian? Does (s)he fly high or is (s)he friendly to talk to? And does the candidate have a forum where (s)he can be contacted conveniently?

Ground Work

Everybody finds candidates who can speak well and present themselves very impressive. It has come to become the only criterion for many. Even IITians are swayed by superfluous oratory! Never had I imagined that IITians who are chosen on account of their ability to reason and apply themselves would vote a candidate based on their speech (which incidentally has been rehearsed umpteen number of time over the past few months). Everything else being equal, I would go by this.

I would rather look at the kind of ground work that the candidate has done. Has (s)he taken the initiative to bring about any changes. And is the candidate willing to work for the betterment of the student community?

Credentials

This factor is quiet tricky. Candidates who stand have impeccable credentials. And their record is immaculate. It becomes very difficult for the voter to decide. For instance, two Core Team member of Kshitij may be standing head to head for the post of General Secretary Technology. Who do you vote then? This is when voters start going by the performance at the SOP box. When the tangible credentials are equal, one HAS to go by the intangible ones - and this is where the randomness and the beauty of elections come in.

The results should be the last of our concerns. Luck plays a big role. Whoever is elected will HAVE TO work hard. Let us a raise to toast to the success of the mini-democracy that we have created within our campus.

[For the latest updates on the result, visit The Scholars' Avenue]