This Blog is written by Harsimar Kaur, a Second-Year Law Student of Lloyd Law College

Overview

Recently, the idea of "One Nation One Election" has drawn a lot of attention, igniting debate and excitement in India's public and political spheres. This initiative, which has the backing of several major figures, seeks to synchronize the Lok Sabha (lower house of Parliament) and State Legislative Assemblies elections so that they can co-occur across the nation. Proponents believe that this would promote political stability, simplify the voting process, and lower the expense of conducting frequent elections. Concerns are voiced by those opposed over the implementation process, potential legal obstacles, and potential effects on India's federal structure.

This blog post will discuss the concept of "One Nation, One Election." We'll examine its advantages, difficulties, and implications for India's democracy.

Understanding "One Nation, One Election"

A recommended method is "One Nation, One Election," in which state and federal elections are held concurrently. From 1951–1952, India employed a concurrent election paradigm in which elections for the State Assembly and Lok Sabha were held simultaneously. This cycle was broken by the early dissolution of the central government and many state assemblies at different points in time, which resulted in a nationwide pattern of unequal election results.[i]

India has had nearly constant election seasons as a result of the many times that elections have been held in various states. Reintroducing simultaneous elections has been proposed, with proponents asserting that this would address numerous issues associated with the current setup.

The Motivation Behind "One Nation, One Election"

1. Lessening of Governance Interference

Regular elections in several states cause disruptions to the regular functioning of state and federal governments. There exists the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), which restricts the government's capacity to implement new initiatives or alter significant policies while elections are taking place. Simultaneous election dates would minimize disruptions and allow governments to function without the MCC's ongoing enforcement.[ii]

2. Active Voting Participation
Advocates of holding elections in parallel argue that this strategy could increase turnout since people will likely be more committed to one big election. Holding two elections at the same time could make voting easier for voters, especially in rural areas where literacy and awareness levels are still rising.

3. Consistency in Governance
Elections held at the same time could improve political stability. Election cycles lining up would provide more defined mandates at the federal and state levels, reducing the possibility of continuous political scheming or the willful breakdown of governments. Reducing the election constraints could allow elected officials to focus more on good governance rather than always participating in campaigns.

4. Economic Effectiveness
The opportunity to cut expenses is a primary argument in favor of simultaneous elections. The government of India spends a lot of money on administration, security, and logistics during elections, which can be highly expensive. Because resources, such as security and officials, would only be needed once for each election period rather than several times for separate state and national elections, holding elections at the same time could result in fewer expenses.

The Challenges Ahead for "One Nation, One Election"

· Effect on Federalism
The "One Nation One Election" proposal has its detractors who claim it could erode India's federal structure. The proper distribution of power between the federal and state governments is essential to India's political system. Elections held simultaneously may cause voters to focus more on national issues, displacing regional and state-specific issues.[iii] In a nation as diverse as India, where every state deals with unique political, economic, and social issues, this could lead to unequal governance and representation.

· Consistent Dissolutions and Polls
An additional concern is the possibility of early dissolution of the Lok Sabha or assembly. Will elections for state assemblies that dissolve before their five-year term ends be postponed until the following scheduled cycle? Would the concept of simultaneous elections be undermined by by-elections? This raises questions regarding how to handle these circumstances without compromising the primary objective of synchronized elections.

· Concerns of Law and Constitution
The legal and constitutional difficulties are a significant obstacle to implementing "One Nation One Election". The Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies are meant to last five years, but they can be dissolved earlier, necessitating fresh elections. It may be necessary for certain state administrations to extend or reduce their tenure to bring the electoral cycles into line. Significant constitutional amendments would be required for this. Legal and political obstacles must be addressed, and various political factions might oppose these reforms.

Potential Scheme and Recommendations

1. Enhancing the Voting Process
India's electoral system needs to be improved for "One Nation One Election" to succeed.[iv] To manage elections simultaneously in a vast and diverse nation, the Election Commission of India (ECI) will need more resources and more expertise. This entails increasing security, modernizing logistics, and making sure that voter services and infrastructure are uniform across the country.

2. Modifications to the Constitution and Laws
We must amend the constitution and legislation to allow for simultaneous elections. To ensure that early dissolutions of the Lok Sabha or state assemblies do not interfere with the synchronized election cycle, we need to include explicit guidelines for handling them. This could entail choices like President's Rule temporary government or emergency election regulations that don't conflict with the general election schedule.

3. Guarding the Federalism
Any strategy for simultaneous elections must consider the unique political, social, and economic circumstances of each state to preserve the balance of power between the federal and state administrations. Making sure that issues at the state and federal levels are appropriately handled during elections is crucial.[v] This could involve educating voters about the importance of casting educated ballots for both houses of government to guarantee that no level is overlooked.

This strategy helps India gain advantages while lowering potential hazards by providing a transparent and equitable means of holding simultaneous elections.

Conclusion

Strong and ambitious, "One Nation One Election" promises advantages including cost savings, streamlined government, and increased political stability. But putting it into practice raises several logistical, legal, and constitutional concerns that must be addressed. While the idea is worthwhile, it would require careful consideration, public participation, and broad political consensus to ensure that switching to simultaneous elections preserves the essential elements of India's federal democracy.

There is still debate, thus it's not certain if the "One Nation One Election" will truly take place or will only serve as a target for future voting reforms.

References:

[i] https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-editorials/examining-one-nation-one-election

[ii] https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/model-code-of-conduct-meaning-9217638/

[iii] https://www.businesstoday.in/india/story/one-nation-one-election-benefits-challenges-way-forward-all-you-need-to-know-446486-2024-09-18

[iv] https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/India/explained-one-nation-one-election-what-is-it-and-how-it-would-change-election-process-in-india/ar-AA1qOQB0

[v] https://www.ndisreview.gov.au/resources/reports/working-together-deliver-ndis/preface/recommendations-and-actions