Examining 'One Nation, One Election': Constitutional Hurdles and Democratic Concerns

The renewed focus on 'One Nation, One Election' (ONOE) is primarily triggered by the recent formation of a High-Level Committee (HLC) in September 2023, chaired by former President Ram Nath Kovind. The government's objective is to reduce the frequency of elections, thereby cutting down on costs and administrative burden associated with separate electoral cycles for the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies.

Implementing 'One Nation, One Election' would necessitate significant constitutional amendments, specifically targeting Articles 83, 172, and 356.

• •Article 83: Governs the duration of the Houses of Parliament (Lok Sabha).
• •Article 172: Governs the duration of State Legislatures (Vidhan Sabhas).
• •Article 356: Pertains to the imposition of President's Rule in states.

The synchronized electoral cycle, where Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assembly elections were held concurrently, broke down after 1967 primarily due to political instability. This instability led to the premature dissolution of several State Legislative Assemblies and, subsequently, even the Lok Sabha itself, before their full five-year terms were completed. This disrupted the fixed five-year cycle.

The 'One Nation, One Election' proposal could significantly impact India's federal structure by potentially centralizing power and reducing the autonomy of states in their electoral processes and governance.

• •Impact on State Legislatures: Requiring state assemblies to align their terms with the Lok Sabha could mean premature dissolution or extension, overriding state mandates and the will of state electorates.
• •President's Rule (Article 356): Modifications to Article 356 might be needed to handle situations where a state government falls mid-term, potentially increasing the imposition of President's Rule or forcing elections for a truncated term, thus centralizing power.
• •Reduced Accountability: State-specific issues might get overshadowed by national narratives during simultaneous polls, reducing the accountability of state leaders on local matters and diluting regional political voices.

Proponents argue that 'One Nation, One Election' would significantly reduce electoral expenditure. The 2014 Lok Sabha election cost approximately Rs 3,870 crore, while the 2019 Lok Sabha election cost around Rs 6,000 crore. However, the Election Commission has estimated an additional cost of approximately Rs 4,500 crore for procuring new Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machines required for simultaneous polls.

Implementing 'One Nation, One Election' involves significant logistical and administrative hurdles for the Election Commission and other agencies, extending beyond just constitutional changes.

• •EVM/VVPAT Requirements: A massive increase in the number of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machines would be needed, incurring substantial costs (estimated Rs 4,500 crore) and production challenges.
• •Security Forces Deployment: Mobilizing and deploying adequate security personnel simultaneously across the entire nation for both Lok Sabha and all State Assembly elections would be an unprecedented and complex challenge.
• •Administrative Burden: The sheer scale of preparing electoral rolls, training polling staff, and managing the election process for all elections at once would place immense pressure on the Election Commission and state administrations.

The primary mandate of the High-Level Committee (HLC) on 'One Nation, One Election', formed in September 2023 under former President Ram Nath Kovind, is to comprehensively examine the feasibility of the proposal. It is tasked with studying the legal and constitutional framework, identifying necessary amendments, and recommending a practical roadmap for implementing simultaneous elections across India.

If elections are held simultaneously, there's a significant risk that national issues and the popularity of national leaders might overshadow local concerns and the performance of state-level politicians. This could have several implications for accountability.

• •Reduced Local Focus: Voters might prioritize national party affiliations and broader policy debates over specific state or constituency issues, leading to less scrutiny of local governance.
• •Diminished Accountability: State governments and MLAs might face less direct accountability for their local performance, as the overall electoral narrative is dominated by national themes and the 'wave' effect.
• •Disadvantage to Regional Parties: Regional parties, which often thrive on local issues and identities, could find it harder to compete against national parties in a synchronized election environment, potentially weakening regional representation.

This is a significant practical and constitutional challenge for 'One Nation, One Election'. To maintain synchronization, several mechanisms could be considered, all requiring substantial constitutional amendments, especially to Article 356.

• •President's Rule: The state could be placed under President's Rule (Article 356) until the next synchronized general election, potentially for a long period, which raises democratic concerns.
• •Fresh Election for Remaining Term: A fresh election could be held, but the newly elected assembly would only serve the remainder of the original synchronized term, not a full five years, which might reduce voter enthusiasm and stability.
• •Vote of Constructive Confidence: A system where a no-confidence motion must simultaneously propose an alternative government, preventing a power vacuum and snap elections.

The years 1952 and 1967 are crucial in understanding the historical context of 'One Nation, One Election' in India.

• •1952: This year marks India's first general election, which was largely held simultaneously for both the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies, setting a precedent for synchronized polls.
• •1967: This was the fourth general election, also largely held simultaneously. However, after 1967, the synchronized cycle broke down due to premature dissolutions of various state assemblies and the Lok Sabha itself, leading to separate election schedules.

Proponents of 'One Nation, One Election' highlight several potential benefits that they believe would improve India's electoral and governance systems.

• •Reduced Costs: Significant savings in government expenditure by eliminating the need for separate logistical arrangements, security deployments, and administrative efforts for frequent elections.
• •Administrative Efficiency: Freeing up administrative and security personnel from continuous election duties, allowing them to focus on their primary governance responsibilities.
• •Policy Continuity: Ensuring that governments can focus on policy implementation and development without the constant interruption of the Model Code of Conduct, which comes into effect with every election.
• •Increased Voter Turnout: Potentially higher voter turnout as voters would only need to go to the polls once every five years for both national and state elections.