Making Sense of the ‘One Nation One Election’ Model

This summer when India held its gargantuan parliamentary elections, in seven phases and spread over more than 40 days, the cost of holding them were estimated at ₹1.35 lakh crore. For the sake of comparison, India’s real GDP or GDP at constant prices is estimated at Rs 173.82 lakh crore. Another comparison: the spending on the 2020 US presidential election was estimated at Rs 1.2 lakh crore.

In the world’s most populous country with nearly a billion eligible voters, holding elections is a costly affair. Countrywide parliamentary elections like this year’s are hugely expensive but so are state and union territory assembly elections. This year, eight states have either already held elections or will do so in the remaining months.

Currently, assembly elections are being held in the union territory of Jammu & Kashmir in three phases. Elections in J&K are being held for the first time since the abrogation of Article 370 on August 5, 2019. The previous assembly elections in the erstwhile state were held in 2014. In a sensitive region such as J&K, the cost of holding elections can be higher because of security concerns.

The spiraling costs of holding multiple elections is one of the reasons why India’s government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi is serious about its “One Nation One Election” proposal. On September 2, the government issued a notification constituting a high-level committee, headed by the President of India, to examine the issue of simultaneous elections.

Costs are certainly one concern that the government has. The sheer size and scale of an election in India can be staggering. In the 2024 parliamentary elections, approximately 12-15 million polling staff and security personnel were involved; there were more than a million polling stations; hundreds of thousands of civil servants were deployed for election management; and thousands of election observers and micro-observers were needed.

Besides human resources, equipment was required. Around 2 million Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs); a similar number of Voter-Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machines had to be deployed; and millions of vials of indelible ink were used to mark voters’ fingers after they had cast their ballots.

Then there were costs such as transportation: thousands of vehicles for transporting personnel and equipment; and helicopters and boats for reaching remote areas.

A general election is held on a national level and, understandably, the cost of holding it is enormous. But state elections are also expensive. India’s largest state, Uttar Pradesh, has nearly 200 million people but even a relatively small state such as Mizoram in the north-eastern region has a population of more than a million. With numbers such as that the logistics can be complex and the costs huge. 

The proposal of the Modi government is for holding simultaneous elections for both the Lok Sabha (lower house of the Indian Parliament) and all state legislative assemblies.

What would this mean? The proposal suggests synchronising the election cycles so that voting for both national and state legislatures happens at the same time, typically once every five years.

The government argues that conducting simultaneous elections could significantly reduce the overall cost of organising multiple separate elections by eliminating duplication of the resources used. It could also streamline the election process and reduce the burden on administrative and security forces that have to be deployed to ensure that the elections are held fairly, peacefully, and smoothly.

Less frequent elections might allow governments to focus more on governance and policy implementation rather than constantly being in “election mode.” The government and supporters of the concurrent election model think that it could reduce the frequency of the model code of conduct coming into effect and, thereby, slowing down government decision-making and implementation.

Yet, the proposal has stoked criticism, particularly from the Opposition and from regional political parties, which play a significant role in Indian politics in the states. 

A model for simultaneous elections could undermine local issues that voters have while voting in state assembly elections. State-level issues might not get the importance they deserve and could get overshadowed by national narratives during elections.

Also, while holding one huge election across the nation, encompassing parliament as well as the states, could reduce duplication of resources and time spent, it could still be a logistical nightmare. 

There are 543 Members of Parliament (MPs) that voters elect in the general elections. If all of India’s 28 states and union territories (UTs) are taken together, there are more than 4,000 seats in legislative assemblies across all the states and UTs. Organising simultaneous elections for all these assemblies and parliament can require several phases and a complex plan that can conceivably be a daunting exercise.

The greater concerns relate to issues such as provisions in India’s Constitution, which currently allows state assemblies to be dissolved mid-term (before the five-year term is over) if needed. If elections are to be held simultaneously, this provision of the Constitution would have to be significantly amended. 

Less frequent elections may also reduce the opportunities for voters to express their views and opinions on a government’s performance and, hence, as some argue, curb democratic rights. 

In India’s federal structure, Indians often vote differently in state elections than they do in the general elections. Opponents of the one election model are apprehensive about a prevailing national mood or sentiment disproportionately affecting the outcomes at both levels and possibly leading to a less diverse representation.

The Opposition’s View

Not surprisingly, India’s Opposition parties have argued that the proposed system could undermine India’s federal structure by aligning state politics too closely with national politics. They fear it may lead to the dominance of national issues over local ones, potentially marginalising state-specific concerns.

There’s also concern that simultaneous elections might benefit larger national parties over regional ones. Smaller parties often rely on state-level issues to gain traction, which could be overshadowed in a combined election.

Some opposition members have expressed concerns that aligning all elections could concentrate too much power, potentially leading to autocratic tendencies.

Yet, the signals are clear that One Nation One Election will become a reality. Last week, when the high-level committee referred to above unanimously recommended the proposal, Prime Minister Modi posted on X: “The Cabinet has accepted the recommendations of the High-Level Committee on Simultaneous Elections. I compliment our former President, Shri Ram Nath Kovind Ji for spearheading this effort and consulting a wide range of stakeholders. This is an important step towards making our democracy even more vibrant and participative.”

As for those not in favour of the proposal, they can probably seek solace in the phonetic abbreviation of the new system: “ONOE”.

One Nation One ElectionRam Nath Kovind

Oppn Leaders Oppose ‘One Nation, One Election’ In Meet With Panel Head Kovind

The chairman of the High-Level Committee (HLC) on One Nation One Election and former President, Ram Nath Kovind, on Tuesday met and interacted with representatives of Trinamool Congress leaders Sudip Bandyopadhyay and Kalyan Banerjee who put forth their opinions on the subject.

The panel chief also met Communist Party of India (Marxist) secretary general Sitaram Yechury and former Rajya Sabha MP Nilotpal Basu and others as part of consultations with political parties. The leaders presented their views on holding simultaneous elections in the country.

Meanwhile, from the Samajwadi Party, KK Srivastava and Dr Harish Chander Yadav attended the meeting, articulating the party’s position with regard to holding simultaneous Elections.

Representatives of these parties also handed over their suggestions in writing to the committee.

Speaking to media persons after calling on the committee’s chairman, TMC leader and MP Kalyan Banerjee said, “Today we appeared before the committee headed by our former President. We opposed the idea of ‘One Nation, One Election’. We are of the view that there is a hidden agenda to replace the time-honoured parliamentary democracy in India towards a dictatorship or a presidential form of government in future. Our constitutional provisions cannot and should not be interfered with.”

Earlier, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee wrote to the high-level committee on ‘One Nation, One Election’, saying that she did not agree with the idea of holding simultaneous elections as the Constitution does not provide for the same.

“Does the Indian Constitution follow the concept of ‘One Nation, One Government? I am afraid it does not. Our Constitution conceives of the Indian nation in a federal manner. Therefore, the Indian nation has been given a Union government and several State governments. If the framers of the Indian Constitution did not mention the concept of ‘One Nation, One Government, how have you arrived at the concept of ‘One Nation, One Election’?” the TMC Supremo stated in her letter to the panel.

After meeting with the High-Level Committee, Yechury told reporters on Tuesday, “We totally disagree with terms of reference of this committee because it is presumed that ‘One Nation, One election’ is possible and all that remains to be decided is how to implement it. In our opinion this presumption itself is wrong. ‘One Nation, One Election’ runs contrary to the spirit of our Constitution. It is anti-democratic and anti-federalism. When a govt loses its majority on the floor of the House, then its continuation is completely undemocratic.”

“India is a vast country with myriad diversities and only a federal set-up can sustain political democracy. Having elections in states at different times is one aspect of the federal system. The Communist Party of India (Marxist) is totally opposed to any artificial attempt to bring about simultaneous elections which can only be done by trampling upon the existing Constitutional scheme of parliamentary democracy,” the CPI(M) stated recently.

Samajwadi Party representatives KK Srivastava and Dr Harish Chander Yadav also handed over the written submissions to the committee, stating that ‘One Country, One Election’ may lead to major gains for national parties while state-level parties are likely to suffer losses. They also voiced fears that it may further aggravate the differences between national and state parties.

According to the Samajwadi Party, there will be many constitutional, structural and political challenges in implementing the ‘One Nation, One Election’ law, as, to extend the tenure of any Legislative Assembly or Lok Sabha by even a day, the Constitution will have to be amended or President’s rule will have to be imposed. Also raising questions on constitutional safeguards or arrangements will be ensured in states where governments are dissolved mid-term, the SP leaders also questioned how a consensus will be reached to increase or decrease the tenure of the legislative assembly.

Earlier, on January 27, Ram Nath Kovind held consultations with Justice UU Lalit, former Chief Justice of India and Justice Sanjib Banerjee, former Chief Justice of Madras High Court and Manan Kumar Mishra, Chairman of the Bar Council of India, who gave their considered opinions on the subject.

Continuing his deliberations with political parties, Kovind also held interactions with Deepak ‘Pandurang’ Dhavalikar, president, of Maharastrawadi Gomantak Party, Goa. The party offered its strong support to the idea of ‘One Nation One Election’, inter alia, arguing that it will strengthen grassroots democracy.

Recently, the committee had also met a delegation of Lok Jan Shakti Party, comprising members including Pashupati Kumar Paras, Union Minister for Food Processing Industries, President Rashtriya Lok Janshakti Party (RLJP), Prince Raj (Member of Parliament, Samastipur, Lok Sabha), Sanjay Sarraf, Spokesperson, Rashtriya Lok Janshakti Party (RLJP), and Ramji Singh, General Secretary, Rashtriya Lok Janshakti Party (RLJP).

The committee had also held consultations with eminent jurists Justice Dilip Bhosale, former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court, and Justice Rajendra Menon, former Chief Justice of Delhi High Court, who articulated their views on the subject.

Initiating discussions with financial and economic experts, Kovind also held interactions with Ajay Singh, president of ASSOCHAM, and chairman and managing director of Spicejet Airlines, who was also accompanied by the Secretary-General and Assistant Secretary-General of ASSOCHAM. Ajay Singh put forth his views in detail on the economic advantages of holding simultaneous elections for the nation.

The High-Level Committee, earlier, initiated a consultative process under the chairmanship of the former President.

The panel recently also sought public opinion on ‘One Nation, One Election’. A public notice in the matter read, “Notice for inviting suggestions from members of the general public for making appropriate changes in the existing legal administrative framework to enable simultaneous elections in the country.” (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Chidambaram One Nation One Election

‘One Nation One Election An Assault On Constitution,’ Says Chidambaram

Congress has rejected the suggestion of ‘one nation, one election’, saying that it is an “assault on the constitution and attack on federalism”.

Addressing a press conference in Hyderabad coinciding with a meeting of the Congress Working Committee (CWC),  party leader P Chidambaram said BJP is seeking to divert attention from the pressing issues and create “a false narrative”.

“One nation, one election is an assault on the Constitution. We reject it. It is an attack on federalism. It will require at least five Constitutional amendments. The BJP knows that it does not have the numbers to pass these constitutional amendments. Yet if it (BJP) puts forward this mirage of One Nation, One Election, it is only to divert attention from the pressing issues and to create a false narrative,” Chidambaram said.

The Centre earlier this month constituted a High-Level Committee to examine the issue of ‘one nation, one election’ and make recommendations for holding simultaneous elections in the country.

The committee is chaired by former President Ram Nath Kovind and includes Home Minister Amit Shah, former Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Ghulam Nabi Azad, former Finance Commission Chairman NK Singh, former Lok Sabha Secretary General Subhash C Kashyap, Senior Advocate Harish Salve and former Chief Vigilance Commissioner Sanjay Kothari.

Adhir Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, who was also named a member of the High-Level Committee,  declined to serve on the panel, saying its “terms of reference have been prepared in a manner to guarantee its conclusions”.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has several times pitched the idea of One Nation, One Election.

Chidambaram said the Congress Working Committee is deliberating on a draft resolution.

“The deliberations are still underway…We are discussing the situation in the country. Broadly, it can be divided into the political situation, the economic crisis that the country faces and the security threats both internal and external that are a great challenge to the country,” the Congress leader said.  

Party leader Jairam Ramesh, who also addressed the press conference, said that CWC will discuss preparations for assembly polls in five states on Sunday.  (ANI)

Read More: https://lokmarg.com/

Eight-Member Committee

Eight-Member Committee To Examine ‘One Nation, One Election’ Headed By Kovind

The Centre on Saturday constituted an eight-member High-Level Committee to examine the issue of ‘one nation, one election’ and make recommendations for holding simultaneous elections in the country.

Apart from former President Ram Nath Kovind, who is Chairman, the committee comprises Home Minister Amit Shah, Congress leader Ahir Ranjan Chowdhury, former Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Ghulam Nabi Azad, former Finance Commission Chairman NK Singh, former Lok Sabha Secretary General Subhash C Kashyap, Senior Advocate Harish Salve and former Chief Vigilance Commissioner Sanjay Kothari.  

A government notification said that Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal will attend the meetings of the High-Level Committee as a special invitee.

The committee has been set up months before assembly polls in five states and ahead of Lok Sabha polls next year.

Parliamentary Affairs Minister Pralhad Joshi had informed about the constitution of the committee on Friday.  

“Right now, a committee has been constituted. A report from the committee will come out which will be discussed. The Parliament is mature, and discussions will take place, there is no need to get nervous. India is called the mother of democracy, there is always an evolution. I will discuss the agenda of the Special session of Parliament,” he said. (ANI)

Read More: http://13.232.95.176/