It is a mutually agreed election code of conduct between the election management body and political parties in order to allow reflection time for the voters to examine and evaluate events before casting their votes. Putting in place the restriction is forbidding contesting candidates and political parties to convince people to vote for a specific candidate or political party.

During the observation of Silent Hours, despite the election campaign, any other public or political events with mass gatherings are prohibited. Media are also prevented, and brought under surveillance of the monitoring team, to restrain from commenting on campaign activities.

It is a timeline for competing forces to remain in self-control through imposing restrictions on movements in order to gauge and gain inner strength for any unexpected outcome from the poll. With the prohibition of public activities and events during the silent hours, it may also recuperate the internal strength and regain the loss of intuitive power of the human body and mind.    

It has become a customary practice that the election campaign is run for a month with a hectic schedule to gain the confidence of the constituency through maintaining direct contact and communication with the voters as well as running from pillar to post guarding owns’ vote cluster with traditional hold and extending its scope and influence to other areas where rival candidates hold their dominance.

Given the geographical landscape and remoteness, the campaigners have to walk long distances to make contact with voters which consumes time and energy. Since day one of the election date announcement political parties, their leaders, contestants, and cadres become hyperactive with election fervors and mood. The election fever rise as the date nears closer to the election day may invite untoward incidents with fist and fights between the rival campaigners. In such circumstances, it is assumed that observing a day and night with silent hours gives respite from a hectic election campaign to calm down an election fever and reduces the chances of frictions and brawls. Therefore observing silent hours is a cooling period to maintain a free and peaceful environment for polling.

From voters’ perspective, it is a time for them for contemplating the expectation of the people, comparing and evaluating the campaign promises of the contesting parties and candidates with their past performances, programs and prospects for delivery. It is thus an important time frame for voters’ paradoxical limit with wise and thoughtful consideration for their social and political choice. In order to keep binding within a social bond, it also provides a space for introspection and maintains social cohesion. Most importantly, the imposition of Silent Hour as an election code of conduct is applied for allowing reflection on campaigning events to reach a decisive conclusion before voting; a rationale for imposing such a restriction is understandable if the electoral environment is a smooth and level playing field.

It is a common practice in functioning democracies all over the world, but not in all countries. South Asia, Afghanistan, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Pakistan follow this practice. In Asia, despite South Asian countries, countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines, South Korea and Thailand follow it. Democratic countries like Australia, France, Greece, Ireland, the New Zealand, and the United Kingdom follow this code of conduct.  

Since over time we have witnessed several changes and transformations in the socio-political and developmental domain in Nepal, not only accessibility to the electoral constituencies through the construction of roads and other modes of transportation, the reach of mass communication, education and social awareness, the voters’ consciousness level has also been tremendously increased. In such a scenario, without giving a second thought, carrying the traditional baggage as a legacy without taking any account of its pros and cons is not a good idea. It would be advisable if the election management body took this into account for a choice with its prudent decision.

Many instances of incidents contradict its principle of it and its objectives. The campaigner becomes more active in disguise. The campaigners may avoid showing off in broad daylight but continue their hidden activities in high frequencies and volume. All illegal and immoral activities take place in the 48 hours of this restricted period, greasing hands, threatening, awarding and rewarding all go unchecked. Free flow of alcohol and merry-making takes place all day long and night uninterrupted. Creating barriers and obstructions, physical, mental and other available sources, in order to check and control the opposing voters are planned and executed the next day from early morning. 

For the candidate and campaigner, this is the most hectic time to convert the election in their favor by using all tactical means and methods through maneuvering the electoral mood in their own favor. Although there remains the restriction on the electoral campaigns as such for physical presence and movement, it cannot check and effectively control the news online portals, social sites and the internet. In some cases, television channels and broadsheet papers also take sides with preferred information to impinge upon and penetrate into the mind of the voters. An uninterrupted flow of disinformation, fake news and biased statements would undoubtedly hurt the spirit of the electoral essence and damage the credibility of the elections. If we cannot effectively monitor disinformation and free flow of money and muscle power in the election and flagrantly misuse silent hours by all the political forces, even mum on its usefulness, why should continue it as a legitimate tool of election code of conduct?

From the Rights perspective, imposing restrictions on peoples’ movement and speech, goes against the spirit of fundamental human rights as well. Since the election management body holds a certain area for voting purposes, where it may have its jurisdiction to impose restrictions for publicity or public speech; putting whole areas circumvented infringes the fundamental rights of the people. Any blanket ban on speech would be unconstitutional. In some countries, the Constitutional Court of the respective countries has ruled out the electoral silence and ban on opinion polls before the election day as a violation of freedom of speech.

Since the observation of silent hours is widely seen as used for nefarious actions by all the powerful political actors putting their whole energy to convert their money and muscle power into votes, this practice should come to an end, if we are committed to making level playing field for electoral context.