ONE NATION ONE POLL

  19-Jul-2019 13:26:00

One nation one poll India BJP TMC Congress


Prime Minister Narendra Modi has initiated the idea of “one nation, one poll" or simultaneous elections to state assemblies and the Lok Sabha. He desires to prevent costly and lengthy elections that bring long periods once governance takes a back seat.

WHAT DOES ONE NATION, ONE POLL MEANS?

The idea of holding simultaneous elections or “one nation, one poll" means conducting polls to the Lok Sabha and the state assemblies together on a single day or in a phased manner, once in five years. This excludes elections to Panchayats and state municipalities as well as by-elections. The initiative will need a constitutional amendment, which will have to be ratified by 50% of the states. This will make it incumbent on all future governments to implement the provision and not leave the process of holding elections to political convenience.

This will involve the restructuring of the Indian election cycle in a manner where elections to the states and the center will get synchronized. This would mean that the voters will cast their votes for electing members of the LS and the state assemblies on a single day, at the same time (or in a phased manner as the case may be.

BACKGROUND OF ONOP

The concept is not new. After the adoption of the Constitution in 1950, polls to the Lok Sabha and all state assemblies were held simultaneously every five years between 1951 and 1967. Premature dissolution of some legislative assemblies in 1968 and 1969 disrupted the cycle. The Modi government may want to give the idea of legal sanctity so that the cycle does not get disrupted again. Of course, lawmakers will have to resolve the conundrum thrown up in case of dissolution of an assembly midway through its five-year term.

It was first suggested in 1999 by the Law Commission. The parliamentary standing committee in a report to Parliament in 2015, examined the feasibility of holding simultaneous polls. The Law Commission then released its draft report in August. The report studied the legal and constitutional questions related to the holding of simultaneous polls.

INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

Simultaneous elections carry an international perspective as well. This system has been practiced in several parts of the world with ease under similar scenarios.

In South Africa, the national assembly, provincial legislatures, and municipal council elections are held simultaneously in a cycle of five years. ‘Party-list proportional representation’ is followed. In Sweden, parties are given seats according to the proportion of the votes they achieve in the elections. County council and municipal council elections are conducted simultaneously. Belgium witnesses five different kinds of elections where European elections and federal elections are held every five years, coinciding with each other. In Indonesia, the presidential and legislative elections would be held simultaneously from 2019. They have made changes in their constitution, striking down some provisions as unconstitutional. The German constitution doesn’t allow the removal of chancellor alone by bringing a no-confidence motion. They also have to agree on some replacement.

There are many more countries like Bolivia, Philippines, Brazil, Costa Rica, and Guatemala, etc. However, they all have a presidential form of government where elections are held simultaneously along with legislative elections.


CURRENT SCENARIO

The Prime Minister of India invited heads of all political parties to a meeting on 19th June, 2019 to discuss the "one nation, one election" idea and other important matters. The idea of One Nation One Election is about structuring the Indian election cycle in a manner such that elections to the Lok Sabha and the State Assemblies are synchronized together.

The PM first presented the idea of ‘one nation, one poll’ early in his previous term. Subsequently, a parliamentary standing committee, the Niti Aayog and the Law Commission deliberated on the issue, sought inputs of parties, and submitted reports. The issue has starkly divided India’s political actors. Its advocates, including the BJP, have argued the move would help focus on governance, reduce expenditure, and help channel security forces more efficiently. Its critics, including the Congress, have alleged that the move will undermine democratic accountability, the federal structure and also pointed to its lack of feasibility within the constitutional scheme.

Any push towards ‘one poll’ will require major constitutional amendments, changing provisions that deal with the duration and dissolution of the Lok Sabha, and the duration and dissolution of state assemblies.

The all-party meeting was attended by chiefs of 21 out of 40 invited parties, while three parties submitted their opinions in writing.

Many leaders of key opposition parties decided not to attend the meeting. The list of leaders who did not attend the meeting included Congress chief Rahul Gandhi, West Bengal CM and Trinamool chief Mamata Banerjee, former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu, Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav, Delhi CM and Aam Aadmi Party chief Arvind Kejriwal.

Odisha Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik extended full support to the idea of 'one nation, one election', saying that frequent polls affect the pace of development and also "rock the spirit of cooperative federalism”. The BJD will fully support the concept of 'one nation, one election'," Patnaik said, adding there has to be a "give and take" attitude in the larger interest of the country.

Mamta Banerjee on Tuesday had turned down the invitation, saying that the Centre should prepare a white paper on the 'one nation, one election' issue for consultations. Mayawati tweeted saying she would have attended the meeting if it was on the subject of electronic voting machines (EVMs).

Congress president Rahul Gandhi, who was invited to the meeting, wrote back to the government expressing his inability to attend. He also wrote a note to the government. Congress decided of staying away from the meeting after consultations with other parties on the issue.

The Left parties, represented by CPI (M) general secretary Sitaram Yechury and CPI's D Raja vehemently opposed the idea, saying it is against the spirit of federalism. AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi also opposed the idea of being against the federal structure.

POSITIVES OF ONE NATION ONE POLL

When the first elections to the Lok Sabha took place in 1951-52, 53 parties contested the elections, around 1874 candidates participated and poll expenses were 11 crores. In 2019 elections, there were 610 political parties, around 9,000 candidates and poll expenses of around 60,000 crore rupees.

It will save public’s money and resources, reduce the burden on administrative setup and security forces, ensure timely implementation of the government policies and also ensure that the government machinery is engaged in developmental activities rather than electioneering.


The voters will be able to judge the policies and programs of the government, both at the state level and the central level. Also, it would be easy for the voters to determine which political party promised what and how it implemented the same.

It is also necessary to solve the problem of governance on the part of the politicians who are ruling. It is generally seen that for short term political gains from a particular assembly election, ruling politicians avoid taking a harsh long term decision which can ultimately help the country in the long run.


The focus of individual parties is on winning elections in different parts of the country instead of actual governance. Violence, hate speeches and surcharged atmosphere will disturb the law and order situation. And democracy will get marred.


Less promotion of individualism over nationalism: Parties to win hearts close to the time of elections, declare individualistic policies to lure the voters and not the nationalistic policies. The spirit of collective policy making gets hampered. Simultaneous elections would stop this.


Smaller role of corruption, casteism: Party funding would not be required every now and then, which would lessen manipulative practices of the parties to raise money. Caste politics won’t be ignited every time elections are around the corner. Free and fair elections will take place.


Model code of conduct (MCC): Political parties wouldn’t make unnecessary measures to win elections in the wake of MCC. The frequent imposition of MCC results in a standstill of the government machinery, thus hindering development and policy implementation.


Increase in voting percentage: It has turned out in many kinds of researches that voters’ participation is motivated with simultaneous elections. It will actually become a special occasion and will excite people more like a festival.


CHALLENGES TO ONE NATION ONE POLL

Advantage to national parties: Regional parties primarily focus on the state legislative elections, whereas national parties can gain additional momentum with their power in each state.


National issues over regional ones: National issues may overpower the regional ones which are equally important to be looked upon. Submerging of regional issues with national issues may create havoc.


Federal structure would be disturbed: The party in power at the Centre might exercise such powers which can hamper the working of parties in power at state levels.


Shortage of staff and security: One election in all levels at a time would require large deployment of forces and resources together for secure and smooth functioning, which would be a big challenge. The ignited election mode would require high security.

Approx. 25-30 lakhs EVMs and VVPAT machines will be needed at one time.


Disturbance in system of checks and balances: In a federal structure, the state governments and the central governments, especially when from opposite parties check each other’s work and evaluate it. This competitive spirit may be curtailed and a lethargic attitude may crawl into working of these governments.


The term of the Lok Sabha and that of the State Legislative Assemblies needs to be synchronized so that the election to both can be held within a given span of time.

Since elections will be held once in five years, it will reduce the government's accountability to the people. Repeated elections keep legislators on their toes and increase accountability.

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS

When an election in a State is postponed until the synchronized phase, President’s rule will have to be imposed in the interim period in that state. This will be a blow to democracy and federalism.

To sync the term of the State Legislative Assemblies with that of the Lok Sabha, the term of the state legislative assemblies can be reduced and increased accordingly and for the same, constitutional amendment would be needed in:

Article 83: It states that the term of the Lok Sabha will be five years from the date of its first sitting.

Article 85: It empowers the President to dissolve the Lok Sabha.

Article 172: It states that the term of the legislative assembly will be five years from the date of its first sitting.

Article 174: It empowers the Governor of the state to dissolve the Legislative Assembly.

Article 356: It authorizes the Central Government to impose President’s Rule for failure of constitutional machinery in the state.

The Representation of the People Act as well as related parliamentary procedure will also need to be amended.

The core issue which hinders its implementation is India’s Parliamentary Form of Government in which the government is accountable to the Lower House (Lok Sabha or Legislative Assembly). It is quite possible that the government can fall before completing its term and the moment government falls, there has to be an election.

HOW WILL THIS CONCEPT WORK?

There were two proposals to conduct simultaneous elections along with 17th Lok Sabha elections. However, both didn't materialize.

One proposal was to make the shift to simultaneous polls in a phased manner, where in general elections for 12 State Assemblies and a Union Territory may be synchronized in 2019, as the rest of the states are in the middle of their five-year term.

These 12 states were Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Odisha, Sikkim, Telangana, Haryana, Jharkhand, Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Mizoram and, Rajasthan. NCT of Delhi (Union Territory with Legislature) also faces polls in 2019. For such a synchronization to happen, besides political consensus and extension of term up to six months in some states, amendments to the Constitution have to be made. Elections to the remaining State Legislative Assemblies and Union Territory with Legislature (Puducherry) will be synchronized by the end of 2021. Thereafter, elections to the Lok Sabha, all the State Legislative Assemblies and Union Territories (with legislatures) will be held simultaneously from 2024.

The second option involved synchronisation in two batches. First, elections to the 12 State Legislative Assemblies and one Union Territory would be synchronized with elections to the Lok Sabha in 2019. Next, elections to the remaining State Legislative Assemblies will be synchronized with that of one Union Territory by the end of 2021. This makes elections across the country synchronized in such a manner that they will be held twice every five years.

CONCLUSION

The Modi proposal may seem to be self-serving, but also has strong logic. Today, some state or central elections are held every few months. This disrupts decision-making, since no policy changes can be taken in the run-up to an election. Second, the more elections are held per year, the more is the black money spent on them, along with associated corruption to fund polls. Third, constant elections divert government from productive projects. Fourth, governments with an assured five-year term can focus on long-term solutions, whereas constant elections put a premium on short-term fixes (freebies, reservations, subsidies).

This is far from what the early leaders of Independent India envisaged. In the 1950s, central and state elections were simultaneous, with no party suggesting it was wrong. But as the years went by, many state and central governments failed to last a full five-term, forcing mid-term elections. This was never the intention of the makers of our Constitution.

We need a compromise solution that reduces the ills of constant elections without giving an overwhelming advantage to the BJP. The answer cannot be BJP’s ‘one nation, one election’ formula.

But why not ‘one nation, two elections’?

Politically, Modi will never be able to sell the idea of simultaneous elections because it will so obviously benefit the BJP at the expense of others. But if he is really serious about reducing costs, corruption and short-termism, he should suggest ‘one nation, two elections’. The central elections should be held every five years and state elections in the mid-point between. Regional parties will see the advantage of having an explicit delinking of state from central elections. All will see the benefit of a fixed-term that means governments cannot be downed by defections. This could help create a new consensus.

A complete, sudden shift at one time to conduct simultaneous elections may fail due to lack of experience, heavy expenditure at a single time and changing dynamics of politics. The preliminary level requires ground work and slower approach to attain the goal of simultaneous elections. The model for conducting two-phased simultaneous election is also suggested where some state assembly elections would conduct elections with Lok Sabha, while others would conduct elections in the mid-term of Lok Sabha. This suggestion comes along with proposal of holding elections every 2.5 years till they become synchronized.

Such models should not exclude the local self-government elections in the process.


It is true that the idea of simultaneous elections at present tends to create a threat to federalism. However, we must not run away from considering much needed reforms in our system. The nature of our constitution is flexible for the reason that amendments shall bring good governance and strength to democracy. Major challenges and dynamic changes may have to be adapted to bring required consistency for empowered federalism. It is not just about elections but also good governance because ballots are more powerful than bullets.


By: Harshika Chhimwal