One Nation One Election – Explained, pointwise

The Union government has constituted a committee under the headship of former President of India Ram Nath Kovind to look into the feasibility of ‘one nation one election’.

Over the years PM Modi has strongly pushed for ‘one nation one election’. The Law Commission also released a draft report examining the legal-constitutional aspects related to the proposal. At present, elections for state assemblies and the Lok Sabha occur separately either at the end of a five-year term for the incumbent government or in the event of dissolution due to various factors.

What is the One nation one election?

Definition- One nation one election refers to the idea of holding simultaneous polls for State Assemblies and the Lok Sabha instead of separate and continuous elections.

What are the arguments in favour of ‘One Nation One Election’?

Reduction of Financial burden on state exchequer – Continuous election cycles are a financial burden on the state exchequer. ‘One Nation One election’ will reduce the overall expenditure on political process by ECI.  E.g. The 2014 Lok Sabha polls cost Rs 3,870 cr to the exchequer and the 2015 Bihar elections alone cost the exchequer 300 cr. ECI has estimated the cost of ‘one nation one election’ to be around Rs.4500 cr.

Better utilisation of financial resources by political parties- Simultaneous elections will reduce the campaign expenditure of political parties and the candidates. This will help smaller regional parties in better management of financial resources.

Reduced duration of ‘model code of conduct’-Frequent imposition of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) during polls stalls all development work for months at a time. It will reduce ‘policy paralysis’ that results from the imposition of the Model Code of Conduct during election time.

Focus on governance instead of being in ‘election mode’- One nation one election” will ensure continuity of policies and programmes of the central and state governments. It will reduce disruption of normal public life as political rallies will be kept to a minimum. It will improve the delivery of essential services to public.

Increase of administrative efficiency- During elections the entire state machinery as well as high-ranking officers from other States who also deputed as observers in the poll-bound State focuses on conducting a free and fair electoral process which impacts the everyday administration because officials are engaged in polling duties. ‘One nation one election’ will increase efficiency of administrative system.

Improvement of Internal security- Frequent Deployment of security forces during elections is use a considerable size of armed police forces which can otherwise be better deployed for better management of internal security problems like naxalism.

Reduced use of ‘black money’- Elections involve considerable expenditure by prospective candidates most of which is black money. ‘One nation one election’ will reduce the circulation of black money in economy.

Reduction of populist measures-Frequent elections forces the political class to think in terms of immediate electoral gains rather than focus on long-term programs and policies which impacts the focus of governance and policymaking. Simultaneous elections would reduce the populist measures.

Increase of voter turnout- According to the Law Commission, simultaneous elections will increase voter turnout because it will be easier for people to cast many votes all at once.

Improvement in social harmony- Frequent elections perpetuate caste, religion, and communal issues across the country as elections are polarising events that have accentuated casteism, communalism, and corruption. Simultaneous elections would reduce the fault lines between communities created due to multiple elections.

What are the arguments against ‘one nation one election’?

Reduced Accountability – Regular elections ensure that the government is under an obligation to listen to the will of the people regularly. Regular state elections serve as feedback mechanism for the political parties. Critics argue that if the government is assured of a fixed term it might lead to autocratic tendencies.

Undermining of Federal Power – In recent years, issues affecting the states have gained political value, which is demonstrated with more regional parties forming state governments like DMK in Tamil Nadu, TDP in Andhra Pradesh & Biju Janata Dal in Odisha. Due to simultaneous elections union elections might overshadow the state election.

Disadvantage for regional parties- Critics argue that simultaneous election would hamper the prospects of regional parties as national issues would dominate the political narrative instead of local issues. Regional parties would not be able to compete against national parties in both money and election strategies.

Against Spirit of Democracy: Critics argue that forcing simultaneous elections is against democracy because trying to force an artificial cycle of elections and restricting the choice for voters is not correct.

Influences choices and electoral behavior- Voters may vote for the same party both at the national and state level which might put regional parties at a disadvantage. According to research report by IDFC Institute if elections are held simultaneously, there’s a 77 percent likelihood of voters favoring the same political party or alliance for both state assemblies and the Lok Sabha. This figure drops to 61 percent if elections are held six months apart.

Threat to internal security- Deployment of heavy security forces for simultaneous elections is a logistical challenge and might endanger the internal security in the country.

Tampering with the democratic will-The present system has been consciously chosen by our forefathers to uphold the will of democracy by providing for regular elections so that people can express their will through the right to vote. Modifying the election system would mean tampering with the power of people to express their democratic will.

What are the challenges in the implementation of One Nation One election?

Constitutional and legal challenges-’One nation one election’ will require change in the Constitution and other legal frameworks. Simultaneous elections would require amendments in five articles of the Constitution –Article 83 (relating to the duration of Houses of Parliament), Article 85 (relating to dissolution of the Lok Sabha by the President), Article 172 (relating to the duration of the state legislatures), Article 174 (relating to dissolution of the state legislatures) and Article 356 (relating to the imposition of the President’s Rule in states). This requires constitutional amendments with 50% ratification of states which is challenging for the government.

Syncing the terms of various state assemblies with Lok Sabha- The terms of different state governments are ending on separate dates and years. To hold simultaneous elections, the Centre will have to make some states agree to curtail the terms of their houses while others to extend theirs. Curtailment and extension of assembly duration is a major challenge.

Judicial Review Challenge- The Use of President rule under 356 to dissolve the state assemblies has been held by the SC to be a part of the judicial review in the S.R. Bommai (1994) and the Rameswar Prasad (2006). Hence, the premature dissolution of state assemblies for ensuring simultaneous election, would attract judicial review.

Local body Election challenge- Local government is a State subject (seventh schedule, List II). All the State Legislatures have passed separate Panchayati Raj Acts and Municipal Acts, fixing the tenure of these bodies as five years, as per Article 243(E) and 243 (U) respectively. Ensuring one nation one election would require changes in 56 sets of legal provisions.

Logistical challenge– Arranging of around 30 lakh electronic voting machines (EVMs) and voter-verified paper audit trail (VVPAT) machines and deploying central forces around the country is a major logistical challenge in the implementation of simultaneous election.

What are the recommendations of various committees formed on ‘one nation one elections?

Election Commission Report in 1983 proposed to bring back simultaneous elections.

170^th Law Commission in 1999 also advocated simultaneous elections.

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice, headed by E M Sudarsana Natchiappan in 2015 recommended simultaneous elections.

What should be the way forward on ‘one nation one election’?

India needs to find innovative solutions to ensure that we can hold simultaneous elections like-

Coupling the ‘no-confidence motion’ along with the ‘vote of confidence’ in an alternative government-This vote of confidence will also mention a leader to head it. After passing both of them (no-confidence motion and vote of confidence), the alternate government will head the government for the remaining term. This will help to maintain the fixed term and can ensure proper simultaneous election cycle.

Categorising states based on proximity to the next general election and having one round of State Assembly polls with the next Lok Sabha election and another round for the remaining States 30 months (2.5 Years) later can also help in ensuring simultaneous election.

Conclusion

Simultaneous election is an idea whose time has come. However, since the issue is concerned with the federal structure of the Constitution, it needs to be discussed and debated properly across the political spectrum to assuage the concerns of regional parties. This will make it easier to implement the idea in the country.

If India opts for ‘one nation, one election’, the world’s biggest democracy will set another unique example as India will be the 4^th country in the world after Belgium, Sweden and South Africa which conduct simultaneous election.