A Proposal For Electoral Reform

In the concept of One Nation, One Election, voters will cast their ballots for both the Lok Sabha and state assembly elections simultaneously.

The union cabinet approved the proposal to conduct simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha, State Assemblies, and local government bodies. This decision stems from the recommendation of the high-level committee on One Nation, One Election, Chaired by former President Ram Nath Kovind.

The Kovind Committee's report, submitted to President Droupadi Murmu on March 14, proposed several constitutional Amendments to synchronize elections at the Central, State, and local levels.

Historical Perspective
The concept of One Nation, One Election is not new to India. From 1952 to 1967, this country saw simultaneous elections. India's democratic journey started with the One Nation, One Election in 1952, and in 1957, India saw the Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabha elections were held simultaneously.

On 31 July 1959, the Union government, led by Pandit Nehru, dismissed the Kerala government. This incident marked the first instance in which the concept of "one nation, one election" began to decline. A closer examination of history reveals that the primary reason for the erosion of this concept was the Union government's use of Article 356 to dismiss a state government that was ruled by the opposition.

Article 356 of the Indian constitution allows the President to take direct control of a state's governance in the event of a constitutional breakdown or failure of governance.

However The "One Nation, One Election" initiative is a political agenda of the BJP. Back in 1999, Mr. Advani expressed the desire for the One Nation, One Election concept. Subsequently, the 170th report of the Election Commission supported this idea, and now efforts are being made to advance this agenda.

A Tale Of Two Eras; Indian Politics From 1952 To 2024

The primary purpose of communicating history is to demonstrate how far we have come and how far we still need to go. The past, whether good or bad, is unchangeable. One cannot live in the past while disregarding future possibilities.

India of 2024 is not the India of 1952, Natural politics disrupted India's electoral calendar and the rise of regional parties all across India took shape elections cannot be dominated by national parties, regional aspiration has to be taken care of as well there are so many more regional parties who are in power as compared to 1952, and they are not going to accept that you have an election almost as a national referendum, each of these parties in their state have their right to have elections on regional issues.

In a multiparty democracy, a presidential form of election is not feasible. At a time when parliamentary elections are becoming increasingly presidential, one nation, one election can exacerbate that trend, and worse it could push a multi-party system steadily towards becoming a one-party system.

The Kovind's Report Fails To Endorse; One Nation, One Election

In practicality The Kovind Committee report doesn't talk about one nation, one election, The report states that 4,000 MLAs and 543 MPs, totaling around 5,000 representatives, would be elected simultaneously. However, the irony is that the 30 lakh local representatives from panchayats and local bodies will be elected at a different time. This means that, in reality, there is no such thing as "one nation, one election.

Undermining The Constitution; Threat To India's Basic Structure

The concept of "one nation, one election" contradicts the fundamental nature and character of India. India is not defined by a single language, culture, religion, region, or color. Instead, it is a union of states where our differences are the source of our country's richness. India thrives in its diversity.

Implementing "One Nation, One Election" goes against the basic structure of the Constitution and undermines the core of federalism. Elections for local bodies, municipalities, and panchayats are conducted under state legislation, and each state has its own set of laws governing these elections. The states have their own election commissions established by the Constitution. If the government attempts to take away this power, it represents an attack on the federal structure of the Constitution.

This is the direct assault, a direct attack on the basic fundamental structure of our constitution, and it demeans the states of the Indian Union, the reality is that every state government is democratically elected by the people, and nobody in the central government or anywhere has the authority to dismiss them at will because they want it to merge with one election.

One nation, one election theory is converting the whole federal structure into a unitary structure. And the real losers are small states such as Goa, Sikkim, Uttrakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Manipur Nagaland. No one is going to care about their issues or their concerns because, from a national perspective, they simply don't matter.

Every state is separate with separate and very complicated issues and people are concerned so people in local elections in state election voters want to know in what manner the government is going to deliver on their promises. Unfortunately if one nation, one election gets implemented then they'll be all submerged in the national agenda.

The stress on the national issues in priority over the regional or the state level issues will convert slowly but pretty steadily the federal structure into a unitary structure.

The very concept of the federal character of the constitution figures in every list of the constituents of the basic structure so the federal character of the constitution cannot be trifled with even by the parliament.

Constitutional Boundaries
When the government loses its majority before completing a five-year term, the Kovind Committee has suggested holding elections only for the remaining part of the term. This raises concerns about undermining the voters' mandate. Voters may be called upon to elect a government for five years, but at other times, they might only be voting for two, three, or even just one year. This system can arbitrarily alter the value of each vote: sometimes a vote represents five years, while at other times it may represent only two, three, or, at worst, one year. If a government fails, the new government should be elected for a full five-year term, not for a truncated term of two, three, or one year.

According to the Indian Constitution Article 83(2) deals with the tenure of the Lok Sabha and says that it shall be for 5 years unless dissolved earlier. Article 172 says that the tenure of State Assemblies shall be 5 years unless dissolved earlier. Here comes the devil in the room any assembly that may not have finished 5 years can be dissolved and the constitution doesn't prescribe a minimum length of life, it says that it shall not be more than it doesn't say it shall not less than that's the loophole given by founding fathers of the constitution in their wisdom.

The responsibility of the legislature is outlined in Article 75(3) which states "In a federal parliamentary democracy, the council of ministers in the Central government and the state government shall be collectively responsible, respectively, to the House of the people and to the Legislative Assembly according to Article 164 (2).

However, state assemblies can only be dissolved for specific reasons outlined in Article 356 of the Constitution. Dissolving an assembly for the purpose of conducting simultaneous elections would constitute a violation of the Constitution.

Simultaneous Election; Way Towards Disaster

According to the Kovind Committee report, a major argument in favor of "One Nation, One Election" is that it is cost-effective. Additionally, the model code of conduct would remain in place for a shorter duration, minimizing its impact on the government's welfare initiatives.

India is for better or worse a democracy and part of democracy is elections, elections are the only way to operationalize democracy, and if we want the cheapest possible elections that means we want the cheapest possible democracy. Monetary value cannot be put above democracy.

Elections are about governance and the model code of conduct puts into effect that does not allow governance to happen or development to happen.

Does the Model Code of Conduct actually prevent governance?
According to the Model Code of Conduct, the government in power will not introduce any new schemes that have the potential to influence the result of the election, and if there is a scheme that the government has come up with in the last 15, or 20 days of their tenure and they feel it is absolutely essential to introduce it. Then the government can seek the election commission's approval to implement that scheme.

So in reality governance does not suffer due to the model code of conduct but it suffers when there is an election in Goa or in any other state municipal corporation, the entire leadership of all political parties descend there, and therefore governance suffers.

A Democracy In Decline
Prime Minister Narendra Modi claims that one nation one election will make India's democracy more vibrant and more participative. It will cut the cost of elections and improve the governance. However in reality one nation one election would make India's democracy less participative and less vibrant the reason being if the state assembly elections are held when.

They are due according to the electoral rhythm of that state then they were not held with anything else until and unless they fall due when the lok sabha election is due but a state assembly has an independent existence under the constitution there's a chapter called the union and other chapter called the state so state assembly has an independent existence the state population has an independent set of concerns about the governance of the state so when that is going to include with the national concerns the participation of the population of the state in the governance of state will be reduced.

In the expenditure business, India is looking for the cheapest possible democracy or we are looking for a very effective or functioning democracy. It is very appalling that money should be saved on elections which is the only way to operationalize a democracy and if we want to have the cheapest possible democracy then we do not deserve to be called a democracy putting a monetary value on democracy is absolutely aberrant.

Voting Behaviour; A Psychological Analysis

What is the process of casting a vote? Currently, there is only one Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) in each polling booth, but after the implementation of "One Nation, One Election," there will be two EVMs in every polling booth. From a psychological perspective, the majority of voters tend to press the same button on both EVMs when selecting their Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) and their Members of Parliament (MPs). Split voting is rarely observed during simultaneous elections.

If we look back at history, from 1952 to 1962, the Congress party won over 350 seats in the Lok Sabha and governed almost every state, with intermittent exceptions in Kerala and Odisha. Therefore, after the implementation of "One Nation, One Election," it can be inferred that the party in power at the center is likely to have a similar government in the state legislature.

Death On Arrival

Passing a bill for "One Nation, One Election" is not a simple task. After obtaining cabinet approval, the first step is to draft a bill amending 5 or 6 articles of the Constitution. This is a complex process, as the bill must be passed by a special majority, which means 2/3 of the members present and voting in each house.

Once the bill is drafted, it may go to the parliamentary committee for review. Following that, it must be approved by 50% of the states. After state approval, the bill is sent to the president, who must then provide assent for it to proceed. It may be reviewed by the Supreme Court.

Ultimately, the "One Nation, One Election" proposal faces significant challenges and is likely to be unfeasible. Fortunately, the Constitution cannot be amended to change the majority needed for passing constitutional amendments under Article 368. The Kovind Committee operates under the assumption that the government in power has a 2/3 majority in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha and will pass the bills accordingly.

A Global Electoral Lens

The concept of "One Nation, One Election" is more feasible in smaller countries. Currently, there are three countries in the world that implement this system: Belgium, Sweden, and South Africa. No other country has adopted the "One Nation, One Election" approach.

The concept of "One Nation, Two Elections" is followed in the United States. This means that all state elections and the general election occur at the same time. During this period, state elections across the country take place alongside the general election. However, we cannot consider the presidential election in the context of a multi-party democracy.

India, with a population of 1.4 billion, is extremely diverse, and the issues faced by different regions can vary significantly. If "One Nation, One Election" were to be implemented in India, the concerns of smaller states might not receive adequate attention. For instance, Uttar Pradesh, which is the sixth largest country in the world by population, has unique challenges that cannot be effectively addressed in a framework that combines national and state elections.

Right To Differ;
The implementation of "One Nation, One Election" will not bring about significant benefits. The reality is that governments will continue to collapse and early elections will remain a common occurrence. The only difference is that the new government will serve a shortened term.

While elections are not exclusively the domain of political parties and politicians, citizens also have an important role in the electoral process, and concerned citizens need to approve it. However, the concept of "One Nation, One Election" is merely a hot air balloon that the government keeps floating; eventually, it will deflate and meet its inevitable end, much like past initiatives such as the broadcast bill and lateral entry. "One Nation, One Election" is failing to make any positive difference in the country's democracy.

Written By:

• Pranav Kumar Pandey, 2nd Year Student of BA.LL.B (Hons.)
• Aditi Singh, 2nd Year Student of BA.LL.B (Hons.)