THE CONTEXT: The One Nation One Election (ONOE) proposal seeks to synchronize national and state elections in India, aiming to streamline the electoral process. Initially perceived as a grand solution without a clear problem, it has sparked debates over its potential impact on democracy and governance.
THE HIGH-LEVEL COMMITTEE (HLC) REPORT
- Overview of the 281-page Report: The HLC report, led by former President Ram Nath Kovind, spans 281 pages and was submitted to the Union Cabinet. It advocates for simultaneous elections at both national and state levels and suggests constitutional amendments to facilitate this change.
- Criticism of the Report’s Methodology and Conclusions: It is argued that the report’s conclusions were predetermined, with its terms of reference designed to justify ONOE. The report has been accused of lacking rigorous analysis and presenting conclusions that align with the current government’s agenda.
- Examples of Questionable Rationales Presented: The report claims that simultaneous elections would reduce voter fatigue and hate speeches while improving civic cohesion. However, these claims have been challenged for lacking empirical support and being based on questionable assumptions.
CORE ARGUMENTS FOR ONOE
- Improved Governance Quality: Proponents argue that ONOE would enhance governance by allowing governments to focus on policy implementation without frequent electoral disruptions.
- Reduced Disruption of Government Machinery: The report suggests that frequent elections disrupt government machinery for about 300 days annually in some states. ONOE is expected to reduce this disruption significantly.
- Cost Savings: Conducting simultaneous elections could save substantial public funds. The 2019 Lok Sabha elections cost approximately ₹60,000 crore; ONOE could reduce such expenses by minimizing election-related costs.
- Reduction in Policy Freeze Periods: Frequent elections lead to policy paralysis due to the Model Code of Conduct. ONOE could minimize these periods, allowing uninterrupted governance.
COUNTERARGUMENTS AND ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS
- Questioning the Extent of Disruption Caused by Elections: Critics question whether the disruption caused by elections is as significant as claimed, comparing it to other events like political rallies or religious gatherings.
- Comparison to Other Types of Disruptions: The disruption from elections is compared to other events that also require extensive government resources, such as large public gatherings or visits by political leaders.
- Existing Powers of the Election Commission: The Election Commission already has powers to club elections within six months. This could be extended to 12 months without requiring constitutional amendments.
- Potential Amendments to the Model Code of Conduct: Amending the Model Code of Conduct could allow regular governance during election periods, reducing policy paralysis without needing simultaneous elections.
THE ISSUES:
CONSTITUTIONAL AND DEMOCRATIC CONCERNS
- Impact on Executive Accountability: In India’s parliamentary democracy, the executive is accountable to the legislature, primarily through mechanisms like Question Hour, debates, and motions of no confidence. ONOE could undermine this accountability by reducing the frequency of elections, which serve as a critical check on executive power. With fewer opportunities for electoral feedback, the executive might face less pressure to remain responsive to legislative scrutiny and public opinion.
- Violation of Federal Principles: India’s quasi-federal system allows states significant autonomy in governance. ONOE could centralize power by aligning state elections with national ones, potentially diminishing state governments’ autonomy. This alignment could lead to a “coat-tails effect,” where state elections are influenced by national political dynamics, undermining the federal principle that allows states to address local issues independently.
- Potential Conflict with the “Basic Structure” of the Constitution: The “basic structure” doctrine, established by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case, protects fundamental aspects of the Constitution from amendments. ONOE might conflict with this doctrine by altering the balance of power between the central and state governments and affecting executive accountability. Implementing ONOE would require significant constitutional amendments, raising concerns about preserving these foundational principles.
POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS
- Advantage to National Parties Over Regional Parties: ONOE could favor national parties by aligning state elections with national narratives, potentially overshadowing local issues. This alignment might lead to a voting pattern that benefits larger parties with broader national appeal, such as the BJP.
- Example of Odisha Assembly Elections: In Odisha, simultaneous elections in 2014 saw the Biju Janata Dal win despite a national trend favoring the BJP. However, critics argue that ONOE could generally tilt electoral outcomes towards national parties by amplifying their influence during simultaneous polls.
- Desire to Reduce Democratic “Clutter”: ONOE is seen by some as an attempt to simplify India’s complex democratic processes by reducing the frequency of elections. This reduction is perceived to streamline governance but is criticized for potentially limiting democratic engagement and accountability.
- Economic Arguments Presented in the HLC Report: The HLC report suggests that ONOE would lead to political stability and economic growth by reducing election-related disruptions. However, these claims are debated, with critics questioning the assumptions underlying such econometric models.
- Middle-Class Fantasies of Electoral Reform: The push for ONOE aligns with certain middle-class desires for electoral reforms that reduce political complexity. These reforms include limiting the number of candidates and imposing thresholds for regional parties, which critics argue could undermine democratic diversity and representation.
THE WAY FORWARD:
- Phased Implementation with Pilot Studies: Instead of a sudden nationwide implementation, ONOE could be introduced gradually, starting with pilot studies in select states. The Election Commission could conduct simultaneous elections for a cluster of states with similar election cycles, such as the five states that went to polls in late 2023 (Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Mizoram, and Telangana). This would provide valuable data on the feasibility and impact of ONOE without requiring immediate constitutional amendments.
- Constitutional Safeguards for Federalism: To address concerns about the violation of federal principles, specific constitutional safeguards could be introduced alongside ONOE implementation. These could include amendments to Article 356 to limit the use of President’s Rule. Strengthening of state legislatures’ powers in certain areas. Creation of a permanent Interstate Council under Article 263 to resolve federal disputes.
- Flexible Synchronization Mechanism: Allow for a window of 6-12 months for state elections to be held along with national elections. Implement a system where state governments can choose to align their terms with the national election cycle voluntarily. Create provisions for mid-term polls at the state level without affecting the national election schedule. This approach would be more in line with the recommendations of the Law Commission’s 170th report, which suggested partial synchronization of elections.
THE CONCLUSION:
While ONOE promises efficiency and cost savings, critics warn it could undermine India’s federal structure and democratic accountability. The proposal reflects broader tensions between simplifying governance and preserving the country’s complex democratic fabric.
UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTION:
Q. Examine the need for electoral reforms as Suggested by various committees with particular reference to “‘one nation- one election” principle. 2024
MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:
Q. Critically examine the concept of “One Nation One Election” (ONOE) in the context of India’s federal structure and democratic principles. Discuss its potential benefits and challenges.
SOURCE:
Spread the Word