One Nation, One Election — Remedy Worse Than Disease

UPSC Syllabus: Gs Paper 2- Constitution of India —historical underpinnings, evolution, features, amendments, significant

provisions and basic structure.  And   Comparison of the Indian constitutional scheme with that of other countries.

Introduction

The proposal of One Nation, One Election aims to hold Lok Sabha and State Assembly elections together to reduce expenditure and administrative disruption. However, comparative experience and constitutional principles raise serious concerns. The proposal may weaken parliamentary accountability, disturb federal balance, and create governance complications. The debate therefore centres on whether administrative convenience justifies altering key democratic safeguards.

The One Nation, One Election Proposal

1. Constitutional Amendment Framework: The proposal is based on the committee chaired by Ram Nath Kovind and introduced through the Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty-ninth Amendment) Bill, 2024 to synchronise national and State elections.
2. Alignment of Legislative Tenures: Proposed Article 82A empowers the President to notify an appointed date from which all State Assembly terms align with the Lok Sabha cycle, even if some Assemblies must end their tenure earlier than five years.
3. Unexpired-Term Elections Mechanism: If a legislature dissolves before completing its tenure, the newly elected House will serve only the remaining period of the original term, rather than receiving a fresh five-year mandate.
4. Election Deferral Authority: The proposal allows the Election Commission of India to recommend deferring State elections if simultaneous conduct is not feasible, while amendments are proposed to Articles 83, 172 and 327 to enable the framework.

Comparative Constitutional Experience

1. Independent Electoral Cycles in Federal Democracies: Countries such as Canada conduct federal and provincial elections separately, showing that federal systems often maintain different democratic rhythms across levels of government.
2. Structural Limits in Australia: Synchronisation is impossible because State legislatures have fixed four-year terms while the federal House of Representatives has a maximum tenure of three years, making electoral cycles naturally different.
3. Institutional Stability in Germany: Stability arises not from simultaneous elections but from the Constructive Vote of No Confidence, which requires Parliament to elect a successor before removing a Chancellor.
4. Electoral System Differences: Countries like South Africa and Indonesia use proportional representation that distributes political power and protects minority voices, while India’s first-past-the-post system allows a national wave to strongly influence State elections.
5. Presidential System Comparison: In the United States, fixed electoral cycles function because the executive does not depend on legislative confidence, which differs fundamentally from a parliamentary system.
6. Indonesia’s Experience as a Cautionary Lesson: Simultaneous elections in 2019 caused nearly 900 poll worker deaths and over 5,000 illnesses, while 2024 elections led to more than 100 deaths and nearly 15,000 illnesses, leading Indonesia’s Constitutional Court in 2025 to order separation of national and local elections from 2029.

Major Concerns with the One Nation, One Election Proposal

1.Parliamentary Accountability vs Stability

1. Parliamentary Responsibility Principle: India adopted a parliamentary system where governments remain in power only while they enjoy legislative confidence. B. R. Ambedkar emphasised that democracy cannot maximise both stability and responsibility simultaneously.
2. Maximum Tenure, Not Guaranteed Tenure: Articles 83 and 172 prescribe only the maximum five-year tenure of legislatures, allowing early dissolution so voters can renew the mandate when confidence collapses.
3. Shift Toward Guaranteed Executive Stability: Synchronised elections treat dissolution as an administrative inconvenience and push the system toward a quasi-presidential logic, weakening continuous legislative accountability.
4. Federalism Concerns
5. Federalism as a Basic Structure Principle: In S. R. Bommai v. Union of India, the Supreme Court affirmed that federalism forms part of the Constitution’s basic structure, recognising the independent constitutional identity of States.
6. Truncation of State Mandates: Synchronisation may shorten State Assembly tenures even when governments retain legislative confidence; for example, a State elected in 2033 could see its mandate end in only one year if the national cycle requires alignment.
7. Loss of Continuous Democratic Feedback: Staggered elections at the national, State and local levels create regular electoral feedback that keeps governments attentive to public opinion, acting as a substitute for recall mechanisms.
8. Problems of Unexpired-Term Elections
9. Devaluation of the Electoral Mandate: Mid-cycle elections would produce governments with shortened mandates, making elections appear provisional and potentially increasing voter apathy.

b.Weak Governance Incentives: Governments with residual tenure may avoid structural reforms and rely on short-term populist policies.

1. Governance Dead Zone Risk: The amendment does not define the minimum duration required to trigger an unexpired-term election, creating uncertainty in governance.
2. Risks of Election Deferral and President’s Rule
3. Unguided Discretion in Election Deferral: Proposed Article 82A allows the Election Commission to recommend deferring State elections without clear criteria, time limits or parliamentary oversight, creating institutional ambiguity.
4. Possibility of Prolonged Unelected Governance: If a State government falls mid-term, President’s Rule may continue while elections are deferred, allowing the Union government to administer the State through the Governor.
5. Weak Institutional Safeguards: Even Article 356 includes parliamentary approval and time limits, while Article 82A creates broader discretionary authority, raising concerns about constitutional misuse.
6. Weakness of the Cost Argument

a.Election Expenditure Is Economically Small: Parliamentary Standing Committee estimates show combined Lok Sabha and Assembly election spending around ₹4,500 crore in 2015-16, about 0.25% of the Union Budget and 0.03% of GDP.

1. Historical Cost Evidence: Data indicates Lok Sabha election expenditure ranged between 0.02% and 0.05% of GDP between 1957 and 2014, showing elections impose a limited fiscal burden.
2. Operational Efficiency of Staggered Elections: Elections are conducted in phases, lasting about 82 days in 2024, allowing rotation of EVMs, VVPATs and security forces.
3. Higher Logistical Demand for Simultaneous Polls: Conducting elections together would require larger numbers of machines, personnel and security forces at the same time, potentially increasing costs and administrative pressure.

Way Forward

1. Respecting Federal Democratic Rhythms: Electoral cycles should respect the independent mandates of States, ensuring that democratic accountability remains continuous and responsive.
2. Respecting Federal Democratic Rhythms: Reforms must maintain the principle that governments remain in office only while they enjoy legislative confidence, which is central to the parliamentary system.
3. Avoiding Constitutional Distortion: Electoral reforms should not undermine federalism or parliamentary responsibility, which form part of the Constitution’s basic structure.
4. Reconsidering the Amendment Proposal: The Justice Kurian Joseph Committee on Union-State Relationsrecommended that the proposed amendment should be withdrawn.

Conclusion

The One Nation, One Election proposal promises administrative efficiency but raises serious constitutional and democratic concerns. It may weaken parliamentary accountability, disturb federal balance and create governance complications through truncated mandates and election deferrals. Election expenditure is relatively small compared to these risks. Preserving staggered electoral cycles therefore remains important for maintaining democratic accountability and constitutional stability.

Question for practice:

Evaluate the constitutional, federal and governance concerns associated with the proposal of One Nation, One Electionin India.

Source: The Hindu