Should the law require people to vote in general elections?

The question of voting is one that concerns the role of citizens, the government and society. With the growing disillusionment of citizens with their government, voter turnouts have gone down. Important decisions of independence have only seen 50% of people show up at voting polls. Yet, it will be argued that the law should not require people to vote as it decreases the quality of democracy and the rights of citizens.
Requiring citizens to vote causes the quality of politics to decrease because the nature of voters change. There are two categories of people that can be identified. First, ones who are genuinely concerned about politics and would vote without the law. Second, ones who are largely apathetic or lack the time to investigate the policies of different parties. The latter are easily persuaded by more superficial rhetoric or entertainment, which is significantly easier to produce, as opposed to in-depth research on social issues. Hence, instead of catering to the people who would vote, try to be informed, and weigh up two sides of an argument, politicians end up directing their resources to the majority that is on the fence, uninterested, and see this process as a bureaucratic one. This diminishes the quality of politics in the country, as it becomes more populist, emotional or simply a mode of entertainment.

There is a symbolic significance to not placing a vote, which should be an absolute right of every citizen. In many countries, citizens feel that there is no suitable candidate in the election. This could attributed to the poor ruling of the government or a flawed electoral system. For example, it is common to hear about opposition parties being banned or undermined. Hence, their abstention is a silent protest against the government, which they feel is the only way to voice their discontent. Elections with poor voter turnouts are a sign that the political situation in a country is poor, and needs fixing. It undermines the governments concerned: they cannot proclaim that they have the support of all their people. This aspect is neglected when all citizens are forced to vote.
One argument that supports requiring people to vote is that it would make democracies more representative. Instead of having politics dominated by certain age groups, classes or ethnicities, the results would be more spread out across society. For example, Brexit was criticized to be a referendum with a disproportionate representation of the rural conservatives over the age of 50. However, this assumes that all people will vote in their own interests and vote responsibly, which may not be the case. If individuals are disillusioned with the government, or apathetic, it is possible that they may vote randomly or give little thought to their choices. This does not improve the quality of democracy since poor politicians may get elected. Even though more people are involved in the process, it does not mean that the outcome is improved. As such, the entire society suffers: the people who genuinely care about politics are underrepresented, even though their vote is more well-thought-out. The law should therefore not require people to vote.
In conclusion, a requirement to vote in general elections will yield poor results for politics, and undermine the rights of citizens. Ultimately, voters must trust their governments and understand their responsibility, which are qualities that cannot be imposed.

Feedback:

It’s a good essay, but it’s also very generic. Your points are also much more focused on practical aspects and less on principle. What I would do is conclude something radical. E.g. In principle, there should be a requisite amount of knowledge of voters. Democracy only works with educated voters. (Education in this case would refer to knowledge of politics and the issues at stake, not the actual education level of people). Hence forcing people to vote would actually be detrimental to democracy. This way, you can add a principled objection to your current practical objections.

1. Also maybe more on the point of elections – which is to allow for democracy and collective decision-making.
2. The governance system and elected decision-maker can only embody those principles with informed voters. Because otherwise, any elected leader would not be exercising “collective decision making”