One Nation, One Election: A Path Forward Or A Constitutional Challenge?

If successful, this initiative could redefine India's electoral framework, ensuring continuity in governance and potentially altering the political dynamics by reducing the influence of regional parties

0
one nation one election

The Union Cabinet’s approval of the “One Nation, One Election” proposal marks a significant move toward aligning India’s electoral process for the Lok Sabha, state assemblies, and local bodies. This ambitious plan, spearheaded by a committee led by former President Ram Nath Kovind, aims to streamline elections and reduce the frequent disruption caused by staggered polling schedules. However, the path to implementation is fraught with constitutional, logistical, and political challenges.

The Roadmap and Immediate Next Steps

The approved proposal outlines a phased approach to achieving simultaneous elections. In the first phase, the Lok Sabha and state assembly elections will be synchronized. This will be followed by a second phase, within 100 days, to include local body elections. To execute this plan, the government has proposed 18 constitutional amendments, requiring the passage of specific bills by Parliament. Notably, certain changes, like implementing a single electoral roll and voter ID system, will necessitate ratification by at least half of the states, adding another layer of complexity to the process.

The immediate next step involves forming an implementation group to facilitate nationwide discussions and build consensus. Given that the BJP does not hold a majority in the Lok Sabha, garnering support from both allies and opposition parties will be crucial. Parliamentary committees, such as a standing committee or a joint parliamentary committee, might play a vital role in this consensus-building effort.

Historical Context and the Present Scenario

India previously experienced simultaneous elections between 1951 and 1967, but since then, mid-term elections, fragmented political landscapes, and varying assembly tenures have disrupted this synchronization. The proposal aims to bring back the practice, with the promise of reducing the financial burden of frequent elections, ensuring policy continuity, and enabling smoother governance.

However, aligning the terms of the various legislative bodies will require maneuvering, including advancing or delaying elections. Current assemblies, like those of Assam, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu (ending in 2026), and others like Goa, Gujarat, and Uttar Pradesh (ending in 2027), have varying timelines that need to be adjusted. Such adjustments might involve either extending or curtailing the terms of sitting members, raising questions about the democratic principles of fixed terms and the voters’ mandate.

Key Constitutional Amendments and Their Implications

To legally embed the “One Nation, One Election” policy, the Kovind committee has recommended amendments to Articles 83 and 172 of the Constitution, which govern the terms of the Lok Sabha and state assemblies, respectively. A one-time transitory measure is suggested to synchronize all elections, with an “appointed date” marking the beginning of this transition. After this date, all subsequent assemblies elected after the general elections will be aligned with the Lok Sabha’s tenure.

This provision introduces the concept of “midterm elections,” where if a government loses its majority before completing its term, fresh elections would be held for the “unexpired term.” This approach might discourage no-confidence motions, as opposition parties might see little strategic benefit in toppling a government that would not serve a full five-year term.

Political Reactions and Challenges

The proposal has sparked mixed reactions. The BJP and its allies, like the Janata Dal (United), have lauded the move, highlighting its potential to end the cycle of continuous elections and policy disruptions. JD(U) spokesperson Rajeev Ranjan Prasad noted that this initiative could lead to long-term benefits for the country.

Conversely, the opposition, led by Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, has criticized the practicality of the plan, accusing the BJP of using such proposals to divert attention from pressing issues. Concerns about the centralization of power, the erosion of federalism, and the dilution of regional issues in a simultaneous electoral environment have also been raised.

The Way Forward and the Long-Term Impact

For the “One Nation, One Election” proposal to become a reality, the government must navigate a complex political and constitutional landscape. The implementation hinges on broad consensus-building across political parties and states. Additionally, logistical challenges, such as aligning electoral rolls, voter lists, and managing the scale of such an exercise, need careful planning and execution.

If successful, this initiative could redefine India’s electoral framework, ensuring continuity in governance and potentially altering the political dynamics by reducing the influence of regional parties. However, it also poses risks to the democratic fabric by potentially sidelining regional issues and concentrating political power.

In essence, “One Nation, One Election” stands at the crossroads of reform and challenge. Its implementation could mark a significant shift in India’s democratic process, but not without navigating the complexities of the nation’s diverse political and federal structure.