One Nation, One Election: A Revolutionary Reform or a Democratic Challenge?

Author: Mudit Bhati, Law Faculty, BHU


This concept of “One Nation, One Election” has sparked a widespread debate in India. The idea behind this concept is to standardize election timelines across India, enabling concurrent Lok Sabha and State Assembly elections every five-years. Whereas, if you look at election system right now, we have multiple elections every year. For example, in 2024, we first had our Lok Sabha elections, then immediately after the Lok Sabha elections, we saw elections in Jammu and Kashmir, Haryana, Maharashtra and Jharkhand and all these elections happened in different months of year. Apart from that are also local body elections for multiple municipalities and panchayats which keeps happening somewhere in the country. It means that in India there is always election happening somewhere in the country. This idea is not new to India. At the time of Independence, elections of Lok Sabha and State legislatures were held simultaneously in 1951-52, 1957, 1962, and 1967. However, this cycle was disrupted due to premature dissolutions of legislative assemblies and the Lok Sabha. Since then, elections in India have followed a staggered schedule, with different states going to the polls at different times. Now this policy of “One Nation, One Election” is considered important because of the following reasons:


● Consistent Governance: Frequent elections often lead to the imposition of the Model Code of Conduct. The MCC (Model Code of Conduct) serves as the framework of rules designed to ensure impartial and transparent elections and monitors the conduct of political parties and governments, it also affects the pace of the developmental programs and related activities in states undergoing elections. MCC also halts the routine administrative initiatives until the elections conclude. This pause doesn’t last for days, sometimes it lasts for months. In 2017, two economists, Bibek Debroy and Kishore Desai uncovered that in the year 2014, governance and developmental activities were suspended for seven months due to the imposition of Model Code of Conduct, three months across the country and about two months in Jharkhand and Jammu and Kashmir and another two months in Maharashtra and Haryana. In Maharashtra, if we combine the days spent in campaigns, polling, and governance paralysis the state loses 300 days during the five-year tenure.


● Cost Efficiency: Holding simultaneous elections reduces the financial burden on the finances. Separate elections require significant expenditure on resources like security, polling, campaigning, etc. The 2019 Lok Sabha elections has been described as the “most expensive election ever” with a study saying that the money spent for the exercise at around Rs 55-60,000 crores, with the ruling BJP estimated to have spent 45 percent of the total expenditure.


● Administrative Hurdles: Every time elections are held, essential services take a hit like police, teachers and local officers are pulled away from their duties. Schools turns into polling stations, police and military forces leave their post and local officials are busy with election work and when we put all these together, it delays the essential services for the citizens of India. Also, the Politicians are more focused on the elections than core government.


● Election Fatigue: Conducting Lok Sabha and State assembly elections together means voters do not have to participate in multiple elections within short intervals, reducing the sense of overburden. Political campaigns, which often dominate public discourse, will occur less frequently, providing citizens a break from the constant noise of political messaging. By reducing the number of elections, voters may perceive each election as more significant, thereby encouraging higher participation and reducing apathy.

The Kovind Committee report revealed that India’s national real GDP growth with simultaneous elections would be 1.5 percentage points higher in the immediate next year, compared to the previous year. To provide context, 1.5% of GDP amounted to Rs 4.5 lakh crore in the financial year 2024.


Although inflation decreases during both simultaneous and non-simultaneous elections, the decline is more pronounced in the case of simultaneous elections, with an estimated difference of approximately 1.1 percentage points. Data also suggest a relatively higher public spending by 17.67 percent post simultaneous election episodes. Notably, spending is more focused on capital rather than revenue, aligning with the observed pattern of higher growth. Additionally, a frequent election cycle introduces uncertainty regarding investment pathways. It is projected that the ratio of the national gross fixed capital formation to GDP is approximately 0.5% points greater during simultaneous election periods. It is estimated that the ratio of the national Gross Fixed Capital Formation to the GDP is about 0.5 percent points higher for simultaneous election episodes.

Now if this bill is that much important for the country, then the question arises is ‘Why is the Opposition against the One Nation, One Election Bill?’ Are they opposing the bill just because of the BJP or there are some really valid reasons for the opposition? Some of the Challenges in implementing One Nation, One Election are as follows:
● Constitutional and Legal hurdles: Implementing the proposal of simultaneous elections will also require at least five constitutional amendments involving article 83, 85, 172, 174, and 356 and relevant laws, such as the Representation of the People Act,1951. The Law Commission’s draft report on simultaneous elections in 2018 also suggested that at least 50 percent of the states should ratify these changes. Achieving consensus among political parties and states for such amendments is very challenging in a deeply divided political system like India.


● Overlapping national and State Issues: In simultaneous elections, national issues and leaders often dominate the discourse. State-specific issues and leaders may struggle to gain visibility, leading to a potential mismatch between the electorate’s priorities and the election outcomes. A unified election cycle may tilt the balance of power towards the central government, reducing the federal spirit. A discussion paper says that “On average, there is a 77% chance that the Indian voter will vote for the same party for both the state and Centre when elections are held simultaneously”.


● Mid-term dissolution: If a state assembly or the Lok Sabha is dissolved prematurely, it necessitates fresh elections. This would require unscheduled elections, breaking the synchronized timeline intended by the One Nation, One Election framework. Delaying elections to maintain synchronization could leave a dissolved government in a caretaker mode, weakening governance and undermining democratic accountability. Alternatives like extending the term of the dissolved legislature or delaying fresh elections would require constitutional changes and could face resistance due to concerns over democratic principles.
Frequent elections, even though costly, ensures that governments remain accountable to the people throughout their term. They provide regular opportunities for citizens to evaluate the performance of their representatives and voice their approval or dissatisfaction. This process strengthens democratic principles, as elected officials are motivated to address public concerns and uphold transparency, knowing they will be judged by voters.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the concept of “One Nation, One Election” represents a bold step towards reforming India’s electoral system, aiming to synchronize the elections of the Lok Sabha and state assemblies. This is a transformative proposal aimed at streamlining India’s electoral system and enhancing governance efficiency. While it offers significant benefits such as cost reduction, policy continuity, and minimizing electoral disruptions, its implementation is fraught with challenges, including constitutional, legal and political complexities. The success of this initiative depends on achieving consensus among stakeholders and addressing concerns about federalism and democratic representation. As India navigates this potential reform, it is imperative to ensure that the spirit of democracy remains uncompromised while striving for a more efficient and cohesive electoral framework.

FAQS

1) What do you understand by “One Nation, One Election”?
It refers to the idea of holding simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha (Parliament) and State legislative assemblies across India, instead of conducting them separately at different times every year.


2) What are the benefits of this “One Nation, One Election”?
   Some of the main benefits includes:
● Minimizing disruptions to governance and development work.
● Ensuring a stable and consistent policy environment.
● Reducing the cost of conducting frequent elections.
● Decreasing voter fatigue and improving voter turnout.


3) What are the challenges of implementing this “One Nation, One Election”?
 

Some of the major challenges of implementing this includes:

● Amending the constitution to align terms of the Lok Sabha and State assemblies.
● Addressing concerns about undermining India’s federal structure and regional representation.
● Simultaneous elections could lead to a national wave, where voters focus on central leadership rather than regional leaders, potentially skewing electoral outcomes in favor of larger parties.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *