Author: S Jyotiranjan
As the world’s largest democracy, India prides itself on the functioning of its robust electoral machinery, as elections are the lifeblood of any democracy, but when conducted in piecemeal fashion, they can become an albatross around the neck of governance. The concept of “One Nation, One Election” (ONOE), which seeks to hold simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha, state assemblies, and local bodies, is an idea that harks back to the nascent days of independent India. Today, it presents itself not merely as a nostalgia-inducing prospect but as an imperative reform whose time has truly arrived, being spearheaded by the High-Level Committee on Simultaneous Elections, under the sagacious guidance of former President Shri Ram Nath Kovind, the proposal for ONOE promises to bring clarity, efficiency, and stability to India’s electoral and governance landscape, which has now received the Union cabinet’s nod.
As we dissect this grandiose idea, exploring its multifarious merits, the intricate recommendations of the Kovind Committee, and how kindred democracies across the globe have implemented similar electoral synchronisation to the benefit of their respective polities we unlearn the stereotypes and embark upon this new journey of electoral reforms.
A Brief Historical Context
The post-independence India basked in the virtue of synchronized elections and in between 1952 and 1967, both the Lok Sabha and state assemblies witnessed their electoral fate determined in tandem. However, the stormy waters of political instability soon caused this harmonization to falter and the premature dissolutions of various state assemblies drove a wedge between the schedules of national and state elections, leading to the staggered elections we are all too familiar with today. The ceaseless election cycle—a democratic jamboree on repeat—became the new norm, a state of affairs that exacted a high price in terms of governance and public expenditure.
The resurrection of ONOE, which has previously been broached in Law Commission reports of 1999 and 2018, and echoed by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice in 2015, offers an opportunity to untangle this electoral knot once and for all. The High-Level Committee’s recent report serves as the latest clarion call for systemic reform, a chance to realign India’s electoral timelines and reap the manifold benefits such synchronization promises.
Key Recommendations of the High-Level Committee Report
The High-Level Committee, in its meticulously detailed report, advocates for a phased introduction of simultaneous elections. The plan envisions the first phase covering elections to the Lok Sabha and state assemblies, while the second phase, scheduled within 100 days of the first, would conduct local body elections. This well-considered staggered approach is designed to ensure a smooth transition, while minimizing disruption.
Constitutional Amendments and Legislative Framework
To breathe life into this grand design, the Committee recommends 15 amendments to the Constitution through two Constitution Amendment Bills.
- First Constitution Amendment Bill:
This suggested bill is proposed to introduce the pivotal Article 82A, which would lay the foundation for simultaneous elections. Article 82A(1) mandates that upon the first sitting of the Lok Sabha following a general election, the President would issue a notification to trigger simultaneous polls across the nation. Furthermore, amendments to Article 327 would empower Parliament to make laws related to conducting simultaneous elections.
- Second Constitution Amendment Bill
The second bill focuses on the synchronization of local body elections. The creation of a Single Electoral Roll for all tiers of government is proposed through inclusion of a new Article 324A, with the Election Commission of India (ECI) collaborating with State Election Commissions to ensure accuracy and prevent duplication.
Proposed Amendments: An explainer
The proposition put forth by the Kovind Committee on One Nation, One Election is as bold as it is ambitious—a paradigm-shifting exercise in harmonizing the electoral rhythms of this vast republic. At its core, the proposal seeks to steer India towards simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies by enshrining Article 82A in the Constitution. And this innovation is indeed meticulously detailed, as it mandates that, the President will notify the effective date for this sweeping change following the first sitting of the House of the People post-general elections.
It goes on to proclaim that, all Legislative Assemblies constituted after this “appointed date” will synchronize their terms with the full tenure of the Lok Sabha, deftly side-stepping potential disruptions. Therefore, should any state Assembly be unable to hold elections simultaneously, the Election Commission of India (ECI) is entrusted with making a recommendation to defer the election, though the Assembly’s term would still conclude alongside the Lok Sabha’s—what a marvel of constitutional clockwork!
Apart from this, the bill further proposes augmenting Article 327, by empowering the Parliament with the authority to legislate over simultaneous elections, thus creating an institutional mechanism for this mammoth coordination. And should a Lok Sabha or Assembly dissolve prematurely, the novel notion of an “unexpired term” would be introduced, whereby the subsequent government serves only until the next national electoral jamboree, as envisaged in the overarching electoral symphony.
Besides, the bill prudently touches upon Union Territories and recommends amendments to ensure uniformity in Assembly elections, lest they deviate from this newly choreographed electoral calendar. What is equally captivating is that, the second Constitution Amendment Bill, which extends this ambition to local self-governance institutions, calling for the synchronization of municipal and panchayat elections, alongside the General Elections—a vision that would require ratification by the states. This “electoral roll unification” would be cemented under Article 324A, with the ECI assuming the mantle of electoral roll preparation, while State Election Commissions are relegated to a consultative role.
Now, starting with Article 325, which currently ensures that “there shall be one general electoral roll for every territorial constituency for elections to either House of Parliament or to the Legislature of a State,” the Kovind Committee audaciously seeks to expand its remit, as it recommends the creation of a single unified electoral roll not just for Parliament and State Legislatures, but also for Municipalities and Panchayats—a comprehensive overhaul intended to standardize and streamline voter registration across all tiers of governance. Besides, under the newly proposed Article 325(2), a single electoral roll for all elections would be prepared by the Election Commission of India (ECI) in consultation with State Election Commissions. Furthermore, Article 325(3) would explicitly empower the ECI’s electoral roll to supersede any previously prepared electoral roll by the State Election Commissions under Articles 243K and 243ZA. In short, this amendment centralises the electoral roll preparation process under the aegis of the ECI, reducing State Election Commissions to a consultative role—an extraordinary reconfiguration that could bolster administrative efficiency.
Now, to be precise the other virtues that ONOE is supposed to entail are:
Financial Prudence
In a nation as vast as India, with over a billion eligible voters, the logistical and financial burden of conducting elections is astronomical and the present system of perpetual elections drains the state’s coffers, necessitating constant expenditure on voter registration, election staff, security arrangements, and polling infrastructure. So, by holding elections simultaneously, India could streamline these processes and significantly reduce costs, channelling public funds towards developmental goals that serve the broader national interest.
Governance Without Disruption
The electoral juggernaut disrupts the delicate machinery of governance and every time an election is announced, the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) is imposed, freezing all policy decisions and halting ongoing developmental projects. So, the relentless frequency of elections thus stymies long-term governance plans, forcing politicians to prioritise short-term electoral gains over sustainable progress. But with ONOE, this endless state of electoral flux would cease, enabling governments to focus on governance for the majority of their tenure without the looming spectre of elections.
Curtailing the Role of Money Power in Politics
In the age of media-saturated elections, the costs of running campaigns have reached staggering proportions and with elections perpetually on the horizon, political parties are perpetually fundraising. This creates fertile ground for the corrosive influence of money in politics, therefore, the fewer the elections, the fewer the campaign cycles, and the less the temptation for political actors to solicit donations in exchange for undue influence. So, ONOE, by consolidating electoral campaigns, promises to rein in the pernicious role of money power in politics, creating a fairer, more level playing field.
Fostering National Unity
India’s diversity is one of its greatest strengths, yet it can also be exploited during elections to stoke divisive sentiments and regional elections, often fought on parochial issues, risk reinforcing the fault lines of caste, religion, and regionalism. And ONOE aims to transcend these narrow concerns by encouraging a unified electoral discourse. And with the national and state elections held simultaneously would force political parties to address issues of national importance, reducing the divisive rhetoric that so often accompanies localised elections.
Addressing Voter Fatigue
Democracy demands participation, but the repeated call to the ballot box risks breeding voter fatigue and many citizens grow weary of frequent elections, and voter turnout in some states has shown signs of declining. Therefore, simultaneous elections would reduce the number of times voters are summoned to the polls, thereby enhancing the gravity of each election and potentially increasing voter turnout.
Electoral Synchronization and experiences from across the globe
India is not alone, in grappling with the challenges of electoral synchronization, rather it is a fact that, several democracies have already embraced the concept of simultaneous elections, and their experiences serve as instructive models. In South Africa, every five years, the National Assembly and provincial legislatures face the electorate together and this system has fostered stability and ensured that national and provincial issues are addressed concurrently.
Similarly in Germany, the Bundestag and state legislatures are elected every four years, and the Chancellor is chosen by the Bundestag and this alignment of electoral cycles has facilitated smooth governance, allowing both federal and state governments to work in tandem.
Further, in Sweden, the elections to Sweden’s Riksdag, which subsequently elects the Prime Minister, are held every four years, synchronised with local and regional elections. This system prevents governance from being interrupted by frequent electoral cycles.
And lastly in United Kingdom, the Fixed-term Parliaments Act of 2011 despite amendments, has provided stability by ensuring elections every five years. This legislative attempt at synchronization underlines the importance of electoral predictability for stable governance.
The inevitable opposition, challenges and criticisms
Coming back to the Indian context, the ONOE of course has its own share of detractors and challenges as with any bold reform. One primary concern is the practical difficulty of aligning electoral cycles for all states and given the propensity for state assemblies to be dissolved prematurely, the challenge of maintaining synchrony is non-trivial. However, the Kovind Committee’s solution—restricting the tenure of prematurely dissolved assemblies to their “unexpired term”—provides a pragmatic workaround.
Moreover, the logistical scale of conducting simultaneous elections in a nation as vast and populous as India is unprecedented. Therefore, the Election Commission of India and State Election Commissions will need to work in seamless coordination, ensuring that voter rolls are harmonized, polling stations are adequately equipped, and security forces are deployed effectively across the length and breadth of the country and these operational concerns, while formidable, are by no means insurmountable with the proper planning and political will.
An idea whose time has come!
As India stands at the threshold of a new era of electoral reform, the idea of One Nation One Election beckons like a lodestar in the night and the High-Level Committee Report has laid down a meticulously thought-out framework, and the arguments in favour of ONOE are nothing short of compelling. In fact, the Kovind Committee envisions a unified, regimented, and streamlined electoral process, transforming India’s staggered election seasons into a single, well-timed crescendo. It is a vision of seamless electoral governance, albeit one that necessitates herculean legislative reforms and, dare I say, a political will akin to the steel in the foundations of our republic. In one stroke, India could significantly reduce election costs, strengthen governance, and foster a sense of national unity, all while curbing the role of money in politics. So, it is quite obvious that, the time for ONOE is now, and its successful implementation could well become the crowning glory of India’s democratic edifice. In the words of Victor Hugo, “No power on earth can stop an idea whose time has come” and it is time for India to heed this clarion call and embark on the journey towards simultaneous elections—an idea whose moment is not just imminent, but overdue.
(The writer is Legal Advisor, KalingaTv, Advocate, Orissa High Court, Additional Central Government Standing Counsel, Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Distinguished Adjunct Professor of Law and Media Studies, SMC, KIIT DU and Consulting Editor- Legal Affairs & Pubic Policy, The Pioneer. Views are personal.)