“One Nation One Election” is a concept that has been discussed in India’s political landscape for several years. It refers to the idea of synchronizing the timing of elections for all levels of government in the country, including elections for the Lok Sabha, state legislative assemblies, and local bodies like municipal and panchayat elections. Currently, these elections are held at different times, often leading to a continuous cycle of elections and the associated expenses, security arrangements, and disruption of governance. The following article analyses the various pros and cons of the following issues and also discuss about its constitutional validity and the changes that are mandatory after implementation of the policy in the laws. By holding simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha (lower house of parliament) and state legislatures, proponents believe it can reduce electoral expenditure, minimize the disruptive impact of continuous campaigning, and foster a more conducive environment for development initiatives. However, this policy has sparked debates concerning its feasibility, potential impact on federalism, and the need for constitutional amendments. Critics argue that practical challenges and potential erosion of regional autonomy must be carefully considered before implementing such a significant electoral reform. Balancing the advantages of synchronized elections with the preservation of democratic values remains a crucial aspect of this ongoing debate.
Merits of the “One Nation One Election” Policy:
One Nation, One Election would save the government a ton of money if implemented. The 2019 Lok Sabha elections cost an astounding Rs 60,000 crore, according to sources. The sum reflects both the expenditures made by the political parties to contest the elections and the expenditures made by the Election Commission of India (ECI) to conduct the elections. Along with time and energy savings, the action might also raise the voter turnout and reduce corruption.
The first benefit is that after the elections are finished, the government can focus on running the country. These days, there are elections in some section of the nation at least every three months. The elections become the centre of the nation’s attention. Everyone gets very interested in these elections since no one wants to lose, including the Prime Minister, Union ministers, chief ministers, ministers, MPs, MLAs, and panchayat members. At different levels and to diverse degrees, the administration is practically paralyzed. The growth prospects for India are severely harmed by this. Second, pursuant to the rule of conduct, generally speaking, no decisions are made during elections. As a result, both at the Centre and in the States and Local Bodies, important policy decisions are postponed. Third, Elections that are conducted concurrently can cut down on the costs the EC incurs. In order to build the required infrastructure, the EC would need to invest a considerable sum of money at first. Four, even when no new policy decision is required, implementation of ongoing projects is slowed down during election seasons because political leaders and government staff are preoccupied with election-related tasks while neglecting normal administration. Fifth, Elections being place frequently is one of the primary causes of political corruption. At every election, a sizable sum of money must be raised. If elections are held concurrently, political parties’ election costs can be dramatically cut. There wouldn’t be any redundant fundraising. This would relieve the general public and corporate community from repeated pressure to donate to candidates. Sixth, to ensure that elections are held peacefully, several police officers and paramilitary forces are employed. Large-scale redeployment is required, which will cost a lot of money. Important law enforcement personnel are also taken away from their crucial duties. Elections that take place simultaneously can limit this deployment. Seventh, having frequent elections forces governments to make political choices in an effort to win over voters. Even though this cannot be completely halted, there will be a decrease in how frequently governments must announce giveaways. Many state governments are insolvent as a result of the frequent elections. Their finances may be in better shape if there were fewer elections. Eighth, the general practice of elected officials engaging in horse trading may disappear if elections are only conducted occasionally. Even with the anti-defection law in place today, loopholes encourage horse trading. Nine, the identical electoral rolls may be utilized in each election. The time and money spent updating the electoral rolls will be greatly reduced as a result. The citizen will also find it easier because, after enrolling, they won’t have to worry about their names disappearing from electoral rolls.[1]
Ten, it is a global practice to have national and state elections together.
Demerits of “One Nation one Election” policy:
Issues pertaining to the constitution: To preserve a balance of power between the national and state governments, India’s federal system and constitution provide for staggered elections at the state and national levels. It would be important to think carefully before changing the Constitution to allow for simultaneous elections. The Representation of the People Act (1951) and five of its articles would need to be changed in order to adopt the new election procedures. The modification would need to be approved by each recognized state and national party.
Elections for state assemblies and the LokSabha are known to be contested on several grounds. While national parties focus on concerns at the federal level, regional parties emphasize local ones. Therefore, it is possible that regional parties won’t be able to strongly advocate for local causes. Regional parties cannot compete with national parties in terms of campaign spending and strategy. Local concerns and voters play a significant role in assembly elections. The regional parties will thus not accept one-time elections.
Currently, all regional parties want elections to be held using ballet papers. If elections are held in a single-round format, the results will not be announced for a very long time. Additionally, because India is a union of states and the federal government provides significant funding to the governments of the same party in the states, there is a 77% likelihood that an Indian voter will support the same party when elections are held concurrently for both the state and the federal government. This is because India is a federal republic.
If it is implemented before the elections in 2024, the Assemblies of at least 19 of the 31 states and UTs will need to be dissolved. The tenure of the government of these states will end in 2024. The tenure of the government may need to be shortened or prolonged for states where elections just have place. It will take a lengthy and tortuous road to rewrite the constitution because of everything that is involved.[2]
Constitutional validity of the “One Nation One Election” policy:
State legislative assemblies’ terms can be adjusted to match those of the LokSabha, and a constitutional modification to Article 83 would be required to do this. Various other articles of Indian Constitution will need a change in case of the implementation of “One nation One Election” policy. Following articles of Indian constitution has to be amended if the policy of “One Nation One Election” is implemented:
Article 83: It states that the term of the LokSabha will be five years from the date of its first sitting.
Article 85: It empowers the President to dissolve the LokSabha.
Article 172: It states that the term of the legislative assembly will be five years from the date of its first sitting.
Article 174: It empowers the Governor of the state to dissolve the Legislative Assembly.
Article 356: It authorizes the Central Government to impose President’s Rule for failure of constitutional machinery in the state.
The Representation of the People Act as well as related parliamentary procedure will also need to be amended.[3]
The concept of “One Nation, One Election” must take into account the possibility of defections within political parties, the declaration of an emergency in states and Union Territories, the imposition of President’s Rule, no-confidence motions, or any other circumstance that might result in the dissolution of the federal or state governments.
Efforts made by government for the flawless decision:
It constituted a High-Level Committee (HLC) headed by former president Ram Nath Kovind to explore the feasibility of a ‘One Nation One Election’. Amit Shah, Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, Ghulam Nabi Azad, the leader of the Congress in the Lok Sabha, the former leader of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha, Subhash C. Kashyap, the former secretary general of the Lok Sabha, Harish Salve, senior attorney Sanjay Kothari, and the former chief vigilance commissioner make up the committee that will assist the former president Kovind.[4]
The terms and references of the high-level committee would – if the government introduces a “One Nation One Election” Bill in the short session. Assess and suggest whether state ratification of the proposed constitutional revisions is necessary.If a hung House, a no-confidence vote, a defection, or any other event results in simultaneous elections, analyze and recommend potential solutions. Also, suggest a framework for synchronizing elections, and more specifically, suggest the phases and time frame within which simultaneous elections may be held if they cannot be held all at once.[5]
Conclusion:
The policy of “One Nation One Election” is a policy with various pro and cons as discussed in the following article it is the approach that we or the government take to make it a best possible policy for the country is the most important factor and use it for the betterment of the country and for the development of the country. It is true that it is very difficult to contest election simultaneously in a big country in India but with effort of all the citizens and with the flawless organization of government, it is possible and can prove to be a boon for our country as discussed above it can save money of tax payers, save time, improve the implementation of policies, can lessen the time for the development and building of new infrastructure. The aim of the article was to give brief about the currently discussed “One Nation One Election” policy and discuss the pros and cons of the policy and also discuss the constitutional validity of the “One Nation One Election” policy. The success of the “One Nation One Election” policy depends upon the efforts taken by the government to make it and implement it in a strict manner and also by the efforts of the citizens by taking it in a serious way.
[1] K J Alphons “One Nation One Election: Better for voter, better for citizen”, September 5 2023, https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/one-nation-one-election-cost-effective-blueprint-8924172/
[2] Analiza Pathak “One nation One Election: What are the major disadvantages and constitutional changes? Explained”, September 2 2023, https://www.india.com/news/india/one-nation-one-election-advantages-disadvantages-and-major-constitutional-challenges-explained-6281888/
[3] Amit Sing “One Nation One Election: Constitutional challenges”, https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-1763-one-nation-one-election-constitutional-challenges.html
[4] Analiza Pathak “One nation One Election: What are the major disadvantages and constitutional changes? Explained”, September 2 2023, https://www.india.com/news/india/one-nation-one-election-advantages-disadvantages-and-major-constitutional-challenges-explained-6281888/
[5] Analiza Pathak “One nation One Election: What are the major disadvantages and constitutional changes? Explained”, September 2 2023, https://www.india.com/news/india/one-nation-one-election-advantages-disadvantages-and-major-constitutional-challenges-explained-6281888/
Author: Makarand Haridas
Juris Centre 