Author – vinaya pathak
University – Swami Vivekanand University Sagar Madhya Pradesh
To the point
India, the world’s largest democracy, conducts elections at various levels—Lok Sabha, State Legislative Assemblies, and local bodies leading to frequent polls across the country. The concept of “One Nation, One Election” proposes synchronizing these elections so that voting for both national and state levels occurs simultaneously. This idea has gained traction in recent years as a means to streamline the electoral process, reduce costs, and improve governance.”One Nation, One Election” refers to a proposal to synchronize elections for the Lok Sabha and all State Legislative assemblies in India so that they are held simultaneously every five years. The proposal envisions holding Lok Sabha and State Assembly elections together once every five years. This would mean that voters across the country would cast their votes for both levels of government on the same day or within a specified time frame. The idea seeks to eliminate the cycle of elections happening somewhere in India almost every few months.
Use of legal jargon
One nation one election necessitates a harmonious alignment of constitutional mandates, legislative provisions, and democratic principles, requiring extensive constitutional engineering and legal reform.
The Indian Constitution, under Article 83(2) and Article 172(1), prescribes a five-year term for the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies, respectively, unless dissolved sooner. Implementing one nation one election requires constitutional amendments under Article 368, involving both special majority in parliament and ratification by half the states for federal provisions.Moreover, provisions under Articles 85(2)(a) and 174(2)(b), which empower the President and Governors to dissolve legislatures, will need re-evaluation to accommodate a fixed electoral cycle.In the Representation of the People Act, 1951, particularly Sections 14 and 15, which relate to the notification of elections. The Election Commission of India (ECI) would need an expanded statutory mandate and a restructured electoral timeline.
The proof
The proposal of one nation, one election election is not just an idealistic vision but one grounded in India’s historical, constitutional, and institutional framework. This electoral harmony broke only after premature dissolutions of some Assemblies and the Lok Sabha, which disrupted the electoral cycle—not due to any structural failure of the concept itself.The concept of One Nation, One Election is supported by historical precedent, legal feasibility, and institutional backing. The system broke due to premature dissolutions, not structural failure.The Law Commission of India (170th and 255th reports) and niti aayog have endorsed One nation one election for reducing cost and administrative burden. Further, global democracies like South Africa and Sweden successfully conduct synchronized elections. With constitutional amendments, electoral reforms, and political consensus, one nation one election is not just a theoretical proposal but a practical, evidence-backed reform with potential to enhance democratic efficiency in India.
Abstract
The idea of one nation, one election (ONOE) represents a transformative vision for India’s electoral system, proposing the synchronization of elections for the Lok Sabha and all State Legislative Assemblies. The central goal of ONOE is to streamline the democratic process by holding a single, unified election every five years, thereby addressing the growing challenges of frequent polls—such as excessive public expenditure, repeated deployment of manpower, disruption to governance, and electoral fatigue among voters. Historically, India conducted simultaneous elections between 1951 and 1967, after which the electoral cycles of the states and the Union government gradually diverged due to early dissolutions of some assemblies and political instability. The revival of this practice is not without precedent, but its implementation today requires comprehensive constitutional and legal reform.For synchronization, several constitutional amendments under Article 368 would be essential, alongside changes in the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and other electoral laws. The proposal has received support from key institutions, including the Law Commission of India (in its 170th and 255th reports), NITI Aayog, and the Election Commission of India. Most recently, the Government of India formed a High-Level Committee chaired by former President Ram Nath Kovind in 2023 to explore its feasibility. Supporters argue that one nation one election would ensure continuous policy implementation, reduce misuse of state resources during elections, and promote political stability.However, the idea is not without criticism. Concerns include the potential erosion of federal autonomy, difficulties in managing mid-term dissolutions, overshadowing of state issues by national narratives, and massive logistical challenges such as increased need for Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and security forces.
Case law
There is no direct case law where Indian courts have adjudicated the constitutional validity or implementation of One Nation, One Election because the proposal is still under discussion and has not yet been implemented.However, certain landmark judgments and legal principles are relevant when analyzing the constitutional and legal aspects of ONOE. Here are a few related case laws and doctrines that provide judicial background for the debate:
1.Election Commission of India v. Union of India (1995)
Upheld the autonomy and powers of the Election Commission of India (ECI). The role of ECI is central to implementing one nation one election Any plan must preserve its independence and constitutional mandate under Article 324.
2.Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) – Basic Structure Doctrine
Any constitutional amendment made to implement one nation one election must not violate the basic structure of the Constitution, which includes federalism, free and fair elections, and democracy. If one nation one election undermines the autonomy of states or democratic representation, it could be struck down as unconstitutional under this doctrine.
3. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) – Federalism and President’s Rule
The Court emphasized the importance of cooperative federalism and state autonomy.
ONOE may require simultaneous dissolution or extension of State Assemblies, which may raise federalism concerns, especially if imposed by the Centre.
Conclusion
The concept of one nation, one election presents a bold and ambitious reform aimed at transforming India’s electoral system. By proposing a single, synchronized electoral cycle for both the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies, it promises to reduce the financial burden of frequent elections, minimize governance disruptions, and promote administrative efficiency. Historical precedent and institutional support from the Law Commission, niti aayog, and Election Commission strengthen its feasibility.
However, the implementation of one nation one election is not without significant challenges. It requires wide-ranging constitutional amendments, logistical readiness, and most importantly, political consensus. Concerns related to federal autonomy, representation of regional issues, and handling mid-term dissolutions must be addressed with legal safeguards and transparent mechanisms.In essence, while ONOE has the potential to bring systemic efficiency and long-term benefits to Indian democracy, its success lies in ensuring that democratic values, federal principles, and the spirit of the Constitution remain intact during any reform process.
FAQ
1. What is One Nation, One Election (ONOE)?
ONOE is a proposed electoral reform that aims to hold elections for the Lok Sabha and all State Legislative Assemblies simultaneously, once every five years.
2.Why is One Nation, One Election being proposed now?
The idea is being considered to reduce the cost of frequent elections, prevent repeated disruptions due to the Model Code of Conduct, and improve administrative and governance efficiency.
3.Will voters benefit from ONOE?
Potentially, yes. ONOE could reduce voter fatigue and increase turnout, but concerns remain that state-level issues may get buried under national agendas during a combined election.
4.What are the constitutional challenges to implementing ONOE?
One nation one election would require amendments to Articles 83, 85, 172, 174, and 356 of the Constitution under Article 368, and changes to the Representation of the People Act, 1951. It would also need the approval of at least half the states.
