What’s the news?

• The government forms a committee to explore the possibility of One Nation, One Election.

Central idea

• In a significant move, the Indian government has established a committee under the leadership of former President Ram Nath Kovind to delve into the viability of implementing the concept of one nation, one election. This proposal coincides with the announcement of a special parliamentary session scheduled between September 18 and 22, with its specific agenda undisclosed.

Historical Context

• Independent India’s initial elections featured simultaneous Lok Sabha and state assembly polls. However, the synchronized cycle was disrupted due to various political changes, including the rise of regional parties.
• Over time, some states aligned their assembly elections with the Lok Sabha polls, while others maintained separate cycles.
• Prime Minister Narendra Modi has consistently advocated for the synchronization of Lok Sabha and state assembly elections.
• He announced the formation of a committee in June 2019 after his re-election, intending to explore this concept in consultation with political party leaders.

Arguments in Favor of Simultaneous Elections

• Cost Efficiency: Conducting multiple elections throughout the year consumes significant resources. Synchronizing elections could lead to substantial cost savings by consolidating administrative efforts, reducing expenses, and optimizing resource allocation.
• Effective Governance: Frequent elections disrupt governance as the Model Code of Conduct restricts policy announcements. Simultaneous elections could ensure uninterrupted policy implementation and governance, benefiting citizens with a consistent and focused administration.
• Resource Rationalization: Organizing elections requires considerable manpower, security personnel, and financial resources. Simultaneous elections would streamline resource allocation, reducing the strain on logistical arrangements and personnel deployment.
• Enhanced Voter Participation: Coordinated elections could potentially boost voter turnout by creating a sense of importance and urgency among citizens to participate in a comprehensive electoral process.
• Engagement of security forces: Deployment of security forces is normally throughout the elections and frequent elections take away a portion of such armed police force which could otherwise be better deployed for other internal security purposes.
• Impact on social fabric: Frequent elections perpetuate caste, religion, and communal issues across the country as elections are polarising events that have accentuated casteism, communalism, and corruption.
• Focus on populist measures: Frequent elections will impact the focus of governance and policymaking as it forces the political class to typically think in terms of immediate electoral gains rather than focus on long-term programs and policies.

Arguments Against Simultaneous Elections

• Logistical Challenges: Coordinating elections across states and levels of government presents significant logistical challenges, including the availability of polling stations, security arrangements, and managing a large-scale operation.
• Regional Representation: Simultaneous elections may favor national parties over regional ones, leading to a reduction in the representation of regional issues and undermining the diversity of political voices.
• Disruption on Government Collapse: If a government collapses before its term concludes, simultaneous elections could lead to a prolonged period of political uncertainty and governance instability at both state and national levels.
• Constitutional Amendments: Implementing simultaneous elections necessitates extensive amendments to the Constitution, electoral laws, and parliamentary procedures, which may require complex negotiations and consensus-building.
• Impact on Federal Structure: Simultaneous elections might blur the distinction between state and national issues, potentially weakening the federal structure and eroding the autonomy of state elections.
• Electoral Commission Capacity: Coordinating simultaneous elections would place a significant burden on the Election Commission’s resources, possibly affecting the efficiency and credibility of the electoral process.
• Complexity of the Anti-Defection Law: Simultaneous elections could complicate the implementation of the anti-defection law, potentially leading to legal challenges and political instability.
• Suppression of Diverse Voices: A single overarching election campaign might overshadow regional concerns and reduce the space for a diverse range of opinions and local issues.

Previous Considerations and Recommendations

• Election Commission’s 1983 Suggestion: In 1983, the Election Commission proposed the idea of holding simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies.
• The Law Commission’s 1999 Recommendation: The Law Commission, led by Justice B.P. Jeevan Reddy, presented its 170th report in May 1999. The report recommended exploring a system where elections for the Lok Sabha and all legislative assemblies are held simultaneously.
• Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s Effort (2003): In 2003, then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee discussed the concept with Congress President Sonia Gandhi. Though initial discussions were positive, the idea did not gain traction beyond that point.
• L.K. Advani’s Proposal (2010): In 2010, BJP leader L.K. Advani proposed fixed-term legislatures and simultaneous Lok Sabha and Assembly elections. He emphasized the need to avoid frequent elections for the stability of governments.
• Election Commission’s Support (2019): In 2019, Chief Election Commissioner Sunil Arora expressed support for the idea of simultaneous elections, calling it a desirable goal. He suggested aligning the terms of state assemblies with the life of the Parliament for successful implementation.
• Parliamentary Standing Committee (2015): The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law, and Justice, led by E.M. Sudarsana Natchiappan, compiled a report in 2015. The report highlighted benefits such as reduced expenditure, policy continuity, and a minimized impact on essential services during election times.
• Law Commission’s Draft Report (2018): In August 2018, the Law Commission, under the leadership of Justice B.S. Chauhan, drafted a report stating that simultaneous elections couldn’t be held within the existing constitutional framework. The Commission recommended amendments to the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act 1951, and parliamentary procedures for its implementation. The report suggested that at least 50% of states ratify constitutional amendments.

Contemporary Perspectives

• BJP’s Manifesto (Recent Years): The BJP included the idea of “one nation, one election” in its election manifesto, viewing it as a means to streamline the electoral process and minimize disruptions caused by frequent elections.
• Opposition’s Reservations (2023): In 2023, leaders from parties such as Jharkhand Mukti Morcha, Shiv Sena (UBT), and the Congress have expressed opposition to the idea of simultaneous elections. They argue that it could diminish the importance of state elections and regional parties, leading to their overshadowing by national leaders.

Way forward?

• The standing committee recommended a cycle of elections, according to which elections to some legislative assemblies whose term end within six months to one year before or after the election date could be held during the midterm of Lok Sabha . For the rest of the states, elections could be held along with the general elections to Lok Sabha.
• Cost can be brought under control by ensuring that the legal cap on expenditure of candidates is followed by all parties.
• Accomplishing one year one election will be easier as it doesn’t require as many legal amendments as simultaneous polls for which the Centre will have to make five amendments to the Constitution.

Conclusion

• The concept of one nation, one election remains a subject of ongoing deliberation in Indian politics. While proponents emphasize its potential advantages, critics raise valid concerns about its implementation and impact on regional dynamics. The future of this proposal will depend on how these considerations are navigated in the evolving political landscape of India.