Reports on the government’s ‘One Nation, One Election’ campaign, which calls for simultaneous Lok Sabha and Assembly elections, were turned in by a committee chaired by former President Ram Nath Kovind. Since its establishment in September, the panel has consulted with 39 political parties, economists, and the Election Commission of India in addition to studying “best practices from other countries”. It stated today that while it supports the concept, it demands a legally sound method that can disrupt and realign current electoral cycles.
The report submitted to President Droupadi Murmu stated that “the committee is of unanimous opinion that simultaneous polls should be held,” adding that elections for the Lok Sabha, Assembly, and local bodies (also synchronized) could be held 100 days after the polls.
What is ‘One Nation, One Election’?
In short, it means that all Indians will cast their votes for central and state representatives in the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections in the same year, if not simultaneously. Nowadays, some people choose a new national union government and a new state government at the same time. These three states—Andhra Pradesh, Sikkim, and Odisha—are slated to cast their ballots concurrently with the Lok Sabha election in April or May. While Jharkhand, Maharashtra, and Haryana will cast ballots later this year, the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir is required by a recent Supreme Court ruling on the restoration of statehood to hold its first Assembly election in six years before September 30.
The remaining states have non-synced five-year cycles; last year, Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Karnataka were among those with varying voting schedules. Considering the size of the nation and the stark topographical and cultural differences between its regions, it should come as no surprise that shifting and synchronizing electoral cycles presents several difficulties, from financial and logistical to conceptual, constitutional, legal, and even practical.
The justifications offered by the government for “One Nation, One Election”
The government’s reasoning for the One Nation, One Election plan was explained by Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal, who also touched on potential obstacles. The Union Law Minister informed the Parliament that one advantage of holding elections simultaneously is that money can be saved. The One Nation, One Election plan lowers the expense of stationing poll workers and security personnel regularly. Such a scheme also reduces the expenditures associated with political party campaigns. Furthermore, synchronous elections could lead to higher voter turnout. These turnouts differ from state to state at the moment.
How Can ‘One Nation, One Election’ Work?
Not without a Constitutional amendment that is approved by the governments of every state, every union territory, and maybe even the major political parties. Legal professionals have cautioned that if the plan is not amended to change five Articles, it will be vulnerable to criticism for allegedly breaking India’s federal system. Articles 83 (term of Parliament), 85 (presidential dissolution of Lok Sabha), 172 (duration of state legislatures), 174 (dissolution of state legislatures), and 356 (imposition of President’s Rule) are these. These are important because one of the main problems is figuring out what to do if a state or even the federal government is dissolved before its term ends or fails a motion of no confidence.
What does the public want?
According to public polls conducted in India, it appears that the populace is prepared to embrace such a proposal. The nation has received more than 21,000 suggestions. Approximately 81% of the total suggestions were in favor of the One Nation, One Election proposal.
Challenges to ‘One Nation, One Election’
There is still a lack of clarity regarding how to handle breaks brought on by the dissolution of the Houses, President’s Rule, or even a hung Assembly or Parliament, aside from coordinating electoral cycles with the least amount of disruption to governance (and making sure all political parties are on board). Regional parties have also noted that, in the face of better-funded parties vying for voters’ attention ahead of the Lok Sabha election, they might not be able to draw attention to local issues as effectively due to their limited resources. The ongoing expense of purchasing electronic voting machines, or EVMS, is another issue. The poll panel has estimated that this will come to almost ₹10,000 crore every 15 years.
Poll Panel’s 2015 Report
No-confidence motions should include the nomination of a new Prime Minister, or Chief Minister, to succeed the incumbent if the incumbent loses, according to a feasibility report on the ‘One Nation, One Election’ idea that the ECI submitted nine years ago. The new leader is then required to take an exam right away. Furthermore, only a short-term election to select a government for the balance of the term should be held in the event of an early dissolution. Several such actions, such as lengthening or shortening terms to aid in synchronizing electoral cycles, were proposed. All in all, the opposition was critical of these because of their weight.
Mamata Banerjee, the chief minister of Bengal, has been one of the most outspoken; in January, she described the proposal as “a design to subvert the basic structure of the establishing a system that would allow “autocracy (in) a democratic garb to enter the national public arena” according to the Constitution. Moreover, MK Stalin, her counterpart from Tamil Nadu, opposed it last month, calling it a “threat to democratic decentralization”. “It is not enshrined in the Indian Constitution and is impractical,” he said. The Aam Aadmi Party has also rejected the proposal, citing concerns that it would undermine the fundamentals of the Constitution and the concept of parliamentary democracy, according to AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal.
The Congress has also denounced it as “undemocratic,” and in their rebuttal, party chief Mallikarjun Kharge questioned the government’s savings justification. But not every opposition party has voiced a complaint. Jammu and Kashmir: The Peoples Democratic Party, the National Conference, and the local Congress unit have called on the government to implement ‘One Nation, One Election‘ from the union territory. One thing stands out in all of this back and forth: although simultaneous polls were the norm in India up until 1967, only four of them were conducted. This was thrown off after some state legislatures were prematurely dissolved.
Conclusion
The “One Nation, One Election” idea has benefits as well as drawbacks. It seeks to improve governance efficiency, cut costs, and streamline the electoral process; however, its implementation necessitates careful consideration of various regional interests, constitutional amendments, logistical challenges, and upholding democratic values. To realize the potential benefits of this initiative, political stakeholders must ultimately agree and guarantee the preservation of democratic values.