Author: Shahrukh Iraqi, Bihar Institute of
ABSTRACT
To reduce polling frequency and promote governance continuity, the “One Nation, One Election” (ONOE) concept aims to synchronize elections for the State Legislative Assemblies and the Lok Sabha. Due in large part to the apparent advantages of lower election costs, more efficient governance, and less political upheaval, this proposition has attracted a lot of attention recently.
However, there are complex legal, political, and logistical issues with adopting ONOE in a federal, varied nation like India. Election synchronization necessitates substantial constitutional changes, a re-evaluation of India’s federal system, and strong electoral support. This article explores these issues, looking at the practical viability, political repercussions, and constitutional obstacles.
The paper explores methods for striking a balance between local autonomy and national objectives, this article highlights possible implementation pathways based on historical precedents and comparative worldwide experiences. To make sure that ONOE is in line with democratic ideals and India’s federal character, recommendations are made for progressive implementation, institutional development, and public consensus-building.
INTRODUCTION
The foundation of democracy is elections, which give people the ability to exercise their right to vote and influence government. The Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies are chosen separately under the unique election system of India, the biggest democracy in the world. This leads to a virtually endless election cycle, which drains substantial administrative and financial resources and causes political leaders to shift their attention from administration to campaign tactics.
These issues are intended to be addressed by the ONOE concept, which calls for holding elections nationwide at the same time. Prior until 1967, when the synchronized electoral cycle was upset by the early dissolution of the Lok Sabha and certain legislatures, this idea was the standard. ONOE has resurfaced in recent years as a plan to increase the effectiveness of governance and lessen interruptions caused by elections. However, there are a number of complex obstacles to overcome in order to execute ONOE, such as political agreement, logistical readiness, and constitutional revisions.
The historical background of ONOE, its possible legal and political repercussions, and its viability within the current Indian environment are all covered in this article. It also outlines the proposal’s advantages and disadvantages and makes suggestions for a well-rounded, gradual implementation plan that respects the country’s federal structure and democratic ideals.
Constitutional Provisions and Requirements
Articles 324–329 of the Indian Constitution provide an extensive framework for elections. Significant changes are required to coordinate the periods of the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies in order to synchronize elections. Important clauses consist of:
Article 83: The Lok Sabha has a five-year term that can be dissolved.
Justification: Imagine the Lok Sabha’s term as a ticking clock that, unless it is dissolved early, resets every five years. This clock must run in perfect sync with state legislatures in order to deploy ONOE.
Article 172: Controls the five-year term limit for State Legislative Assemblies.
Justification: The legislative assembly of every state has its own timer. In order to synchronize these clocks, terms would need to be extended or shortened, which presents difficult moral and legal issues.
Article 85 and 174: Permit the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies to be dissolved early in specific situations.
Justification: These articles ensure flexibility, akin to emergency brakes in governance. For ONOE, these emergency brakes must be re-engineered to maintain synchronized election cycles without compromising democratic integrity.
Challenges to Implementation
Dissolution and Mid-Term Polls: Aligning the terms of all legislatures poses a constitutional challenge, as it would involve curtailing or extending existing terms. This may conflict with democratic principles of representation and accountability.
Creative Insight: ONOE requires that all political words synchronize, which is as difficult as coordinating many musical tempos. Picture conducting a symphony in which each instrument plays its part flawlessly.
Anti-Defection Laws: By-elections are required because lawmakers frequently retire or defect. Under ONOE, significant legal reorganization would be necessary to manage such emergencies without interfering with the synchronized cycle.
Creative Insight: Imagine a domino game where the sequence can be overturned by a single, unexpected move. Under ONOE, dealing with defections is like building indestructible dominoes.
Judicial Precedents: In SR Bommai v. Union of India, the Supreme Court emphasized the need of democratic accountability by stressing that assemblies cannot be inactive for long stretches of time. This makes it more difficult to coordinate election cycles while maintaining democratic standards.
Creative Insight: In new legal territory, judicial decisions serve as a compass, keeping us on course. These decisions emphasize the dangers of veering off track for ONOE.
Political Challenges
Impact on Federalism
The federal structure of India gives states a great deal of autonomy, including the ability to hold elections on their own. This autonomy could be undermined if ONOE centralizes election schedules.
Creative Insight: Imagine India as a quilt, with each state adding a distinctive piece. The richness of federal diversity may be diminished if ONOE flattens these patches into a single, homogeneous design.
Risk of Uniform Narratives
Due to the dominance of national campaigns and narratives, simultaneous elections may overshadow state-specific challenges. This could disadvantage local leadership by weakening the emphasis on regional issues and governance.
Creative Insight: Consider a spotlight that is so intense that it obscures other viewpoints. Regional voices may be ignored while national issues take centre stage.
Regional Parties and Representation
The influence of regional parties, critical for addressing state-specific issues, may diminish under ONOE. In a synchronized election framework, smaller parties could find it difficult to compete with national parties’ supremacy, which could have an effect on India’s diversified political landscape.
Creative Insight: Regional parties provide solutions suited to local requirements, much like thriving local markets. These markets run the risk of becoming generic mega-malls due to ONOE’s centralized model.
Comparative Perspectives
Using administrative simplicity and cost effectiveness, nations like Sweden and South Africa hold simultaneous elections for various governmental levels. However, a straight comparison is difficult due to India’s demographic and governmental complexity. The success of synchronized elections depends on strong institutional frameworks, efficient planning, and phased implementation, according to lessons learned from these nations.
Creative Insight: Gaining knowledge from other countries is like to taking recipes from a global kitchen; India needs to modify these recipes to fit its own democratic tastes.
Practical Feasibility
Logistical Challenges
It takes a tremendous amount of work to hold simultaneous elections for India’s enormous population. Increased resources would be required by the Election Commission of India (ECI), including:
Additional electronic voting machines (EVMs) and voter-verified paper audit trails (VVPATs).
Expanded polling infrastructure and personnel.
Extensive voter awareness and education campaigns.
Creative Insight: Imagine organizing a large celebration; to celebrate democracy on this size, every booth, ballot, and employee needs to be precisely organized.
Financial Implications
The initial implementation expenses, which include constitutional reforms, infrastructure development, and institutional strengthening, are substantial, even though ONOE promises long-term cost reductions by lowering recurring election expenditures. A detailed cost-benefit analysis is crucial to assess its financial viability.
Creative Insight: Consider ONOE as constructing a dam; the long-term benefit is the promise of a regulated and effective governing flow, but the initial investment is huge.
Pros and Cons
Benefits
Cost Efficiency: The recurring expenses of running polls, sending out security forces, and overseeing administrative procedures are decreased when elections are consolidated. The exchequer’s financial load is significantly reduced, allowing money to be allocated to development projects.
Governance Continuity: Frees political leadership from frequent election cycles, enabling sustained policymaking and governance. With fewer elections, the focus shifts from political maneuvering to effective governance and long-term strategic planning.
Reduction in Electoral Fatigue: Streamlines the democratic process, benefiting voters and institutions. Voters are less likely to experience fatigue from repeated elections, and institutional resources can be allocated more efficiently.
Enhanced National Focus: To promote coherent policy implementation and a shared developmental trajectory, a synchronized electoral cycle can bring national and state-level agendas into alignment.
Drawbacks
Democratic Flexibility: Election synchronization can make it more difficult to respond to demands and mandates unique to each state. For instance, the cycle would be upset, and legislative recalibrations would be required if political crises forced midterm elections.
Implementation Challenges: A great deal of administrative and legal preparation is needed to manage mid-term demands and align terms. This procedure could unintentionally result in overlaps or periods of government stagnation.
Erosion of Federal Principles: State autonomy and political variety may be impacted by centralized election schedules. Given that national parties control the coordinated electoral scene, smaller and regional parties may be marginalized.
Logistical Hurdles: It is an administrative problem to oversee elections for a nation with more than 900 million voters at the same time. States’ varying capacities and resources make the task even more difficult.
Conclusion
The proposal of One Nation, One Election is a visionary attempt to address the inefficiencies of India’s current electoral system. The difficulties of constitutional revisions, political agreement, and logistical readiness cannot be overstated, even while the advantages of cost savings, stable governance, and less political upheavals are indisputable. Its success depends on a consultative and progressive strategy.
Any moves toward implementation must be supported by preserving federal ideals, developing public awareness, and strengthening electoral institutions. ONOE, if pursued with diligence and inclusivity, has the potential to transform India’s democratic process without compromising its pluralistic values.
FAQS
Q1: What is the primary objective of One Nation, One Election?
The primary objective is to reduce the frequency of elections, streamline governance, and minimize electoral expenditure while maintaining democratic accountability.
Q2: Has India ever practiced simultaneous elections?
Yes, India conducted simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies until 1967. The cycle was disrupted due to premature dissolutions of certain assemblies and the Lok Sabha.
Q3: What are the constitutional challenges to ONOE?
Key challenges include amending Articles 83, 85, 172, 174, and related provisions to synchronize terms and manage mid-term exigencies without undermining democratic accountability.
Q4: How will ONOE impact regional parties?
Regional parties may face reduced influence as synchronized elections could amplify the dominance of national narratives, potentially overshadowing state-specific issues.
Q5: Are there global examples of simultaneous elections?
Countries like South Africa and Sweden conduct simultaneous elections, but their political systems and administrative structures differ significantly from India’s federal and demographic complexities.
Q6: What logistical preparations are needed for ONOE?
Extensive logistical preparations include procuring additional EVMs and VVPATs, expanding polling infrastructure, training personnel, and conducting voter awareness campaigns.
Q7: Is ONOE feasible soon?
ONOE is feasible with phased implementation and robust institutional reforms. Building consensus among stakeholders and addressing legal and logistical challenges are prerequisites.
Q8: How can mid-term emergencies be managed under ONOE?
Introducing contingency provisions, such as temporary administrators or by-elections limited to specific constituencies, can address mid-term emergencies without disrupting the synchronized cycle.
