India, the largest democracy in the world, experiences elections at various levels national, state, and local — throughout its vast geographical expanse. Election and electoral processes are thus continuous in India with some portion of the country voting each year, while in recent years, there have been discussions centred on the concept of 'One Nation, One Election' with simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha and all state assemblies. This proposal intends to reduce the frequency of elections and ensure stability of governance and a reduction of the state and financial burden on the country.
Simultaneous elections are the ones where Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies' elections are happening simultaneously. Although this was the case with India, which continued with the simultaneous election system for Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies from 1952 to 1967, the system had been abandoned primarily because of the dissolution of some state assemblies during that period and political instability that followed, leading to separate election schedules for states and the Union government.
The idea was first revived in its 170th report by the Law Commission of India in 1999. Since then, many government panels and many political leaders, of whom PM Modi is one of the staunchest advocates, have come forward to pitch for it. They are of the opinion that when elections are synchronized across the country, it will improve governance, as special and exacting attention will not be paid to electoral aspects and the path must be clear for governing free from the obstacle of working on crafting a campaign, running up to elections.
Advantages of simultaneous elections:
Savings of Exchequer Money:
A combination of two elections would reduce the drain of sequential elections financially upon the exchequer. The costs involved in visits of security forces, printing ballots, and maintaining election machinery become very large for each election. With a single election of Lok Sabha and state assemblies, duplication in administrative expenditure would be reduced drastically.
Minimizing Political Instability:
These ceaseless elections are irritating for the political disarray. Frequent elections distract governments as political parties and leaders busy themselves in campaign work. The focus of the government then is more on popular programs and short-term electoral gains instead of long-term planning for policies. There would be an era of political stability and governance during the timeframe of simultaneous elections rather than that of the constant fear of forthcoming elections.
Voter Fatigue and Voluntary Participation:
Multiple elections within short intervals can lead to a feeling of voter fatigue, where citizens may lose interest in participating. Consolidating elections would be beneficial in allowing for more voters to participate in one major occasion instead of having multiple elections leading to reduced interest in exercising their democratic right.
Less Pressure on Security Forces:
The deployment of security personnel is essential to ensure free and fair elections. Holding elections at different times entails extensive mobilization of forces several times a year. Conducting simultaneous elections would ease the pressures on security forces and enable them to engage in their normal functions.
Challenges of Simultaneous Elections:
Amendments are required to the Constitution-At least a few articles need to be amended to enable the simultaneous conduct. In particular, Articles 83, 85, 172, 174, and 356 are to be amended, which deal with the duration of the Houses, their empowerment to dissolve the assemblies they constitute, and the subsequent dissolution of the Parliament once a House is elected. Thus, the challenge of tampering with federalism and democratic ideals while carrying out the abovementioned amendments is quite daunting.
Political Consensus:
The cross-party consensus on issues is another giant hurdle that has to be cleared. Regional parties may feel that elections might divert the attention from local burning issues to national ones. In a politically diverse country like India, the balancing of national and state interests remains precarious.
Premature Dissolutions:
Another major question is what happens if a government loses its majority mid-term in either the Lok Sabha or the state assembly. Will that body hold fresh elections immediately, or will the whole country go in for elections again? This might impair the system's stability and lead to political uncertainty.
Logistical Difficulties:
Logistically, the challenge to hold elections across the length and breadth of India is convincing enough. Managing over 900 million voters and thousands of polling stations and their officials would require wonderful planning and execution. Although India has been capable of conducting elections at such a massive scale, the scale and complexities of organized elections in one go would need far more infrastructural development and electoral reforms.
International Practice:
Many countries of the world hold simultaneous elections, such as South Africa, Sweden, and Belgium. Here, national and regional elections are held at the same time, which reduces costs as well as administrative overhead and provides political stability. Hence these examples demonstrate that the system of simultaneous elections can be effectively handled; however, they also depict the necessity of a robust institutional framework along with general political consensus so that the system works effectively.
Conclusion
This 'one nation, one election idea' has gained currency to propose a reduction in the number and cost of elections in India, while ensuring stability in governance. However, its implementation would require substantial changes in the Constitution, logistics, and governance. These would be costly in terms of finance and treatment administration, but there exists the possibility of undermining federalism with certain associated difficulties that could lead to political instability.
For such an unprecedented change to succeed, there exists a need for political consensus, thorough planning, and careful handling of the existing diversity of India and the possibility that this political consensus seeks some middle ground — e.g., some states calling for simultaneous elections or some sort of possible clustering of states voting within certain broader zones or regions. Such a solution might offer some of the benefits of simultaneous elections while providing a degree of flexibility that Indian democracy must still enjoy.
. . .
Reference:
- Election Commission of India. "Report on the Feasibility of Holding Simultaneous Elections." 2019.
- Law Commission of India, 170th Report. "Reform of the Electoral Laws," 1999.
- Sridharan, E. "The Case for and Against Simultaneous Elections in India." The Hindu, 2021.
- "One Nation, One Election: What it Means for India." Observer Research Foundation, 2022.