whether voter should have Negative vote right.

I do not agree with negative vote. Negative vote is a vote for anarchy. The objective of voting is to elect legislators and enable formation of government. Negative vote means that all candidates are rejected. The negative voter has no role accept to say that he likes no one. A government has to be run by 'some one' and not by 'no one'. If you do not like any candidate, you should take initiative to bring forward some candidate whom you like.

vijay,

Though negative vote can be implemented it is not going to help society in any way and many people may misuse their voting rights. The result can be not known whom to elect..

I think rather than this negative vote people should have a right to analyse the performance of their elected member once in a year or twice in a year and have a right to call them back.

I agree with Gulshan and Abid. Rather than wasting energy and resources on negative voting, it is better to first analyze who the right candidate is and then vote accordingly!

In that case Election commitee should public all the form fill by such candidate..

which show their earning,property,criminal record,in paper..

We see thier property in paper but no paper reflect their criminal record...how would u anaylse then..

Its a good suggestion. thus we can know the view of people on all the candidate.

The real issue is that people do not vote on a candidate's performance but on basis of caste and other narrow considerations. some times, even a known criminal contesting from jail is elected. If people are vigilant, right candidates will be elected.

In that case each voter will have to be provided two votes one with which he can give negative vote to party not working and another to elect the party he wants.