Context: A committee has been formed under the headship of former President of India Ram Nath Kovind, to look into the feasibility of simultaneous elections to State Assemblies and the Lok Sabha.
About One Nation One Election
- The idea of "One Nation One Election" entails aligning the electoral cycles of Indian Lok Sabha (LS) and State Assemblies, allowing voters to cast their ballots for both on a single day.
- This practice was prevalent until 1967, but it was discontinued following the dissolution of some assemblies in 1968 and 1969, followed by the dissolution of the Lok Sabha in 1970.
Arguments in Favour
- Firstly, it reduces the frequent imposition of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), which often leads to policy paralysis and disrupts essential developmental work.
- Secondly, it curtails substantial expenditures incurred by political parties, individual candidates, and other stakeholders.
- Thirdly, it optimises the deployment of security forces, freeing them up for other vital internal security purposes.
- Fourthly, it addresses the issue of frequent elections hindering legislative work, preventing governments from squandering resources on short-term, unproductive freebies.
- Furthermore, it diminishes the divisive influence of caste, religion, and communal issues in society.
- Lastly, it minimises the hidden and unquantifiable socio-economic costs, such as teachers missing from schools, revenue machinery diverted to election-related work, and the economic costs of lost teaching weeks and poorly executed welfare programs for the disadvantaged.
Arguments Against
- Aligning the terms of various assemblies would necessitate constitutional changes, which are currently difficult to implement.
- Additionally, the absence of fixed terms for the Lok Sabha and state assemblies complicates synchronisation efforts.
- Further, this move infringes upon the spirit of federalism, limiting the state legislatures' authority to unseat a government through no-confidence motions.
- It also complicates voters' decision-making as they must weigh national and local issues simultaneously.
- Frequent elections and electoral outcomes serve as mechanisms for governments to make necessary course corrections, and this might be hindered by simultaneous elections.
- Logistic challenges, including arranging Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs), manpower, and security forces, present practical difficulties.
- Moreover, regional parties may face a comparative disadvantage against national parties in such a setup.
The Way Forward
To address these concerns, various suggestions have been proposed.
- One approach is to conduct elections in two phases, as recommended by a Parliamentary Standing Committee. Phase I would coincide with Lok Sabha elections, while Phase II would occur approximately midway through the Lok Sabha's term, resulting in elections every 2.5 years once synchronisation is achieved.
- The Election Commission has recommended measures to avoid premature dissolution, such as moving confidence and no-confidence motions together and conducting fresh elections for the remainder of the term.
- Additionally, the Law Commission has put forward recommendations:
- It includes defining "simultaneous elections” in the Representation of the People Act (RPA) of 1951 and amending provisions to ensure that LS and assembly constituencies formed after midterm elections serve only for the remaining term.
- The anti-defection law could be amended to prevent stalemates, and the statutory limit for general election notifications could be extended. It's proposed that no-confidence motions could be followed by the option to form an alternative government.
- Lastly, the Prime Minister or Chief Minister could be elected to lead the Lok Sabha or Assembly by the entire house, similar to electing the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, providing greater stability to the government.
Conclusion
Implementing simultaneous elections in India is a complex undertaking requiring extensive coordination and consultation among all stakeholders. A phased synchronisation of LS and Assembly tenures, as suggested by a Parliamentary Committee, may be a more feasible approach than an immediate, one-time overhaul of the electoral system.